Accessibility is a requirement now. Start with the measured list.
The European Accessibility Act has applied since 28 June 2025 to in-scope products and services sold into the EU, and accessibility lawsuits against US websites are reported in the thousands per year. I run a fixed-scope audit on up to 10 agreed pages: an automated scan with axe-core — the engine behind many accessibility tools — plus a manual keyboard-and-focus pass over your key flows. Every finding names the WCAG success criterion, the exact element, the measured evidence and the fix.
Fixed-scope audit — one website, up to 10 agreed pages, USD 149 once
The first run was, as always, on this shop: 5 pages, 16 October 2026 — 0 auto-detected violations, 9 elements flagged for manual contrast review — all 9 reviewed and all pass AA (lowest measured 6.29:1, requirement 4.5:1). The engine's raw output and the review numbers are public, so those numbers are checkable: /a11y-baseline.json.
What this is
An accessibility audit of agreed pages and an agreed method — two legs, both measured:
- Automated leg. axe-core runs against each agreed page in a real browser engine. Automation reliably catches a known slice of accessibility problems — commonly estimated at around a third of what a full manual audit finds — and it is exactly reproducible: you can re-run the same engine and compare. The raw output is part of the delivery.
- Manual leg. A person tabs through your key flows and notes what a script cannot decide: focus order and visibility, keyboard traps, heading and landmark structure, and the accessible names and roles of your main controls.
Findings are separated into confirmed defects, manual-review items, passing checks and not-checked items. Each confirmed defect carries its WCAG success criterion (for example 1.4.3 Contrast Minimum), the exact element, the observed evidence, reproduction steps, a justified severity and a suggested fix. Items the engine could not decide are flagged for manual review — and anything outside what was actually tested is listed as not checked, never as passed.
What this deliberately is not
- Not legal advice and not a certificate. No technical report — mine or anyone's — makes a website “certified compliant”. Whether the EAA or ADA apply to your business is a question for your lawyer. What can be measured, I measure and show.
- Not a screen-reader-with-real-users study. Criteria that need testing with actual assistive-technology users are marked not-checked, with the reason stated.
- Not an overlay widget. The findings describe changes to the site itself — which is what assistive technology actually reads.
- Not unlimited. Agreed pages, agreed method, one pass. Larger sites and repeat passes are quoted in writing first.
Who it is for
- Small e-commerce and service businesses selling into the EU, where the EAA has applied since mid-2025.
- US businesses under ADA pressure — or holding an actual complaint — who need the technical state of the site in writing before anyone starts selling them a fix.
- Agencies and freelancers who want an independent pass to hand to their client (white-label and per-volume work are quoted in writing).
- Anyone who wants measured facts before paying a remediation vendor, or a second opinion after one.
What you receive
- 1. A written findings report
- Per agreed page: each confirmed defect with its WCAG success criterion, the exact element and selector, the measured evidence, reproduction steps, a justified severity and a suggested fix.
- 2. The raw engine output
- The automated scan results for each page, in the same shape as the baseline published for this shop — re-runnable and comparable over time.
- 3. Manual pass notes
- Keyboard journey notes: tab order, focus visibility, trap points, heading/landmark structure, and the names and roles of the main controls.
- 4. One clarification round
- One round of written explanation or correction of the findings is included.
How ordering works
- Contact. Send the scope form (or email hello@openyuri.com) with the site and the pages you care about most.
- Written scope + fixed price. We agree the page list and the method — both sides confirm before any work.
- Payment. A payment link for the agreed amount — card, processed by Waffo.com Limited (merchant of record) — or a PayPal invoice in USD, no PayPal account required.
- Audit within the agreed window. I deliver the findings report on the date we committed to after seeing your page list.
- One clarification round. Fixes beyond the report, and re-verification after fixes, are quoted separately per agreed milestone.
Pricing, in writing before payment
Example scope line, used verbatim in the written quote:
Accessibility audit (WCAG 2.1 AA) — one website, up to 10 agreed pages, automated axe-core scan plus manual keyboard/focus pass, findings report and one clarification round. USD 149.
- Larger scopes (more pages, multiple languages, templates) and agency / white-label work: quoted after a written scope.
- Re-verification after you ship fixes: quoted per agreed milestone, same as every other piece of work in this shop.
Not sure yet? Three findings, free
Email hello@openyuri.com with one live URL — a site you own or are authorised to have checked — and the subject line a11y. You get back three things I actually measured on that page: the WCAG criterion, the exact element, what was measured, and how to re-check it yourself. Before any invoice exists. If the page is genuinely clean and three findings would be padding, I say so instead of dressing it up.
Verify the numbers
Everything in this shop runs on the same rule: numbers first, raw output public.
- /a11y-baseline.json — the engine's raw output for this shop, run 16 October 2026 (5 pages, 0 violations, 9 manual-review items, all reviewed and passing).
- The checklist — how the same measured approach works for indexability and technical review, with real numbers from runs on our own sites.
- Work & references — the self-owned properties these runs come from.