Yes, a checklist for evaluating software in the accessibility category covers eight functional areas: audit data intake, issue tracking, remediation workflow, monitoring, reporting, VPAT and ACR generation, user and role management, and conformance documentation. A useful checklist measures whether the software supports human-led evaluation data, not whether it scores well on automated checks alone. Software built around scan output captures roughly 25 percent of WCAG issues. Software built around audit data captures the full picture and supports the work that follows.
| Area | What to Verify |
|---|---|
| Data Foundation | Accepts audit data, not only scan output. Issue records include WCAG criterion, severity, location, and remediation guidance. |
| Workflow | Assignment, status tracking, validation, and audit history per issue. |
| Monitoring | Scheduled scans on public and authenticated pages with alerting on regressions. |
| Reporting | Progress reports, conformance status, and exportable VPAT or ACR documentation. |
| Access | Role-based permissions for auditors, developers, project managers, and executives. |
Data Foundation
The first checklist item is what the software actually holds. Accessibility software that relies only on scan output works from a partial dataset. A scan evaluates HTML, CSS, and ARIA attributes against a fixed set of programmatic rules and flags approximately 25 percent of WCAG issues.
The remaining 75 percent requires human evaluation through screen reader testing, keyboard testing, visual inspection, and code review.
Verify that the software accepts audit data as a primary input. Issue records should include the WCAG success criterion, conformance level, severity, page or screen location, and remediation guidance. Without this structure, the data layer is too thin to support meaningful tracking.
Issue Tracking and Remediation Workflow
The software should let teams assign issues, change status, log fix attempts, and record validation outcomes. Each issue needs an audit trail showing who worked on it, when status changed, and what evidence supports closure. This is what distinguishes a tracking platform from a static report.
Prioritization features matter here. Look for user impact scoring and risk factor scoring so teams work on the highest-value items first. For a wider view of how platforms compare on workflow features, the platform comparison pillar covers the categories in depth.
Monitoring and Scans
Scans inside the software should run on a schedule: daily, weekly, monthly, or custom. Scheduled scans surface regressions introduced by new code or content. Authenticated page scans extend coverage to logged-in areas through a browser extension running within an active session.
Scan output complements audit data; it does not replace it. The checklist item is whether the software treats scans as one signal among several rather than the only source of truth.
Reporting and Documentation
Reports should communicate progress to different audiences. Executives need conformance status and trend lines. Developers need issue lists with locations and code context. Procurement teams need VPAT and ACR output that reflects current audit findings.
Check whether the software generates these artifacts directly from the underlying audit data or whether documentation has to be assembled manually outside the system.
Roles, Permissions, and Collaboration
Accessibility work spans auditors, developers, designers, project managers, legal, and procurement. The software should support distinct roles with appropriate permissions. Auditors create and verify issues. Developers update status and attach evidence.
Managers track velocity. Executives see summaries.
What a Functional Checklist Looks Like
- Audit data intake: imports structured audit results, not scan output alone
- Issue records: WCAG criterion, level, severity, location, remediation notes
- Prioritization: user impact and risk factor scoring
- Workflow: assignment, status, validation, history
- Scans: scheduled, authenticated, alerting
- Reports: progress, conformance, exportable formats
- Conformance documentation: VPAT and ACR generation from live data
- Access control: role-based permissions across teams
A checklist is only as good as the framing behind it. The right question is not which software has the most features. It is which software supports the full evaluation process, from human-led audit through remediation, validation, and conformance reporting.