ACCESSIBILITY & RESPONSIVE UX

Accessibility Audits and Responsive Fixes That Make Your Website Usable for Everyone

Ignited Nepal audits and fixes websites for WCAG 2.1 AA compliance and responsive layout across the full device range. We run manual and automated testing using Axe and WAVE, screen reader testing with JAWS and NVDA, keyboard navigation review, colour contrast analysis, ARIA implementation, and mobile UX remediation. We deliver audit reports you can act on and confirmation retests that close the loop.

Request an Accessibility Audit → View the evidence →
WCAG 2.1 AA compliance auditing and remediation · Equality Act 2010 and PSBAR compliance support · Manual screen reader testing with JAWS and NVDA · Keyboard navigation, colour contrast, and ARIA
This is for you if

Who This Is For

You run a public sector website, a government-funded service, or a site that operates under the Public Sector Bodies Accessibility Regulations 2018. Your accessibility statement needs to be accurate, your site needs to meet WCAG 2.1 AA, and you need documented evidence that you have tested it. A self-assessment against the GDS accessibility checklist is not the same as a proper audit with a written remediation plan.

The Equality Act 2010 requires that service providers make reasonable adjustments for disabled people. A website that is not usable by someone with a visual impairment, motor disability, or cognitive difference may constitute unlawful discrimination. You are not aware of any formal complaints yet, but you know your site has not been tested, and you want to address that before it becomes a problem.

You commissioned an automated scan, or a third party reviewed your site, and you have a list of accessibility issues you do not know how to prioritise or fix. You need someone to interpret the findings, separate the critical issues from the minor ones, and handle the remediation so the next audit produces a different result.

What's broken

What's Broken

Your Automated Scan Caught 20% of the Issues

Automated tools like Axe and WAVE are valuable for identifying certain classes of accessibility failure: missing alt text, low colour contrast ratios, absent form labels, and missing document language declarations. They do not catch everything. Screen reader behaviour, keyboard navigation logic, focus management after dynamic interactions, and the quality of ARIA implementation all require manual testing. Most websites that have only been scanned with automated tools have significant accessibility failures that the scan never found.

Your Site Cannot Be Used Without a Mouse

Keyboard-only navigation is a fundamental accessibility requirement. Users who cannot use a mouse, whether due to motor disability, temporary injury, or preference, must be able to operate every function on your site using only a keyboard. If focus indicators are invisible, if modals trap focus or do not return it correctly, if custom dropdown menus are not keyboard-operable, and if skip navigation links are missing, your site is failing a substantial portion of your potential users.

Your Colour Contrast Fails on Body Text, Buttons, or Both

WCAG 2.1 AA requires a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 for normal text and 3:1 for large text and graphical elements. Many brand colour palettes, particularly those that use grey text on white backgrounds or light-coloured buttons with white labels, do not meet this threshold. The issue is rarely with the primary heading colours. It is usually with secondary text, placeholder text, button labels, link colours on non-white backgrounds, and icon-only controls.

Your Responsive Layout Breaks at Mid-Range Viewports

Most responsive design work focuses on a desktop breakpoint and a mobile breakpoint. The mid-range, tablets in landscape, large phones, and non-standard screen widths, is where layouts most commonly fail. Text overlaps, navigation collapses incorrectly, buttons become too small to tap, and content reflows in ways that break the reading order. These failures are invisible to developers testing on standard viewport sizes and only surface when a user is on a real device.

What we engineer

What We Do

Automated Accessibility Scan

We run a full automated scan of your site using Axe and WAVE, covering every page type in your information architecture. We document every flagged issue, classify it by WCAG 2.1 criterion, and identify the pattern so that fixing one instance of a structural issue fixes all instances of it, rather than treating every individual element as a separate remediation task.

Manual Screen Reader Testing

We test your site with JAWS and NVDA on Windows, which are the screen readers most commonly used by blind and low-vision users in the UK. We test navigation by heading structure, navigation by landmark, link text quality, form label associations, error message announcements, and the behaviour of any dynamic content, modal dialogues, carousels, or custom interface components.

Keyboard Navigation Audit

We test every interactive element on your site using keyboard only. We check that all focusable elements receive visible focus indicators, that tab order follows the visual reading order, that custom components implement keyboard interaction patterns correctly, that modals and overlays manage focus correctly when opened and closed, and that skip-to-content links are present and functional.

Colour Contrast Report

We test every text and graphical element against its background for contrast ratio compliance with WCAG 2.1 AA requirements. We document every failure with the current ratio, the required ratio, and a compliant colour value that preserves the intent of your brand palette. We do not recommend arbitrary colour changes; we recommend the minimum adjustment that achieves compliance.

ARIA Implementation Review

We review the use of ARIA roles, states, and properties across your site. We identify instances of ARIA misuse, which is common and often more damaging than no ARIA at all, instances where ARIA is absent from components that require it, and instances where native HTML elements should replace ARIA-heavy custom implementations. Correct ARIA implementation is one of the highest-impact accessibility interventions on modern JavaScript-heavy sites.

Responsive Layout Audit and Fixes

We test your site across the full range of viewport widths from 320px to 1920px and on real iOS and Android devices. We document every layout failure and implement the fixes in your codebase. We test navigation collapse behaviour, touch target sizes, font size and line height at small viewports, content reflow, and the behaviour of any fixed or sticky elements across device types.

Accessibility Audit Report and Retest Confirmation

We deliver a written accessibility audit report classifying every issue as critical, major, or minor, with a description of the failure, the WCAG 2.1 criterion it violates, and a recommended fix. After remediation, we conduct a full retest and issue a retest confirmation report documenting that the identified issues have been resolved. This report supports your accessibility statement and provides evidence of due diligence.

Request an Accessibility Audit →
What changes

What Changes

Before
After
Before Automated tools like Axe and WAVE are valuable for identifying certain classes of accessibility failure: missing alt text, low colour contrast ratios, absent form labels, and missing document language declarations. They do not catch everything. Screen reader behaviour, keyboard navigation logic, focus management after dynamic interactions, and the quality of ARIA implementation all require manual testing. Most websites that have only been scanned with automated tools have significant accessibility failures that the scan never found.
After One in five people in the UK has a disability. Many of those disabilities affect how a person interacts with a website: visual impairments that require screen readers or magnification, motor disabilities that require keyboard or switch access, cognitive differences that require clear language and predictable navigation. An accessible site is not a niche requirement. It is the baseline for a site that works for everyone.
Before Keyboard-only navigation is a fundamental accessibility requirement. Users who cannot use a mouse, whether due to motor disability, temporary injury, or preference, must be able to operate every function on your site using only a keyboard. If focus indicators are invisible, if modals trap focus or do not return it correctly, if custom dropdown menus are not keyboard-operable, and if skip navigation links are missing, your site is failing a substantial portion of your potential users.
After For public sector bodies under PSBAR, an up-to-date accessibility statement supported by a documented audit is a legal requirement. For private sector organisations under the Equality Act 2010, documented evidence of reasonable adjustment efforts is your defence in the event of a complaint. An audit report and retest confirmation give you that documentation.
Before WCAG 2.1 AA requires a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 for normal text and 3:1 for large text and graphical elements. Many brand colour palettes, particularly those that use grey text on white backgrounds or light-coloured buttons with white labels, do not meet this threshold. The issue is rarely with the primary heading colours. It is usually with secondary text, placeholder text, button labels, link colours on non-white backgrounds, and icon-only controls.
After Responsive layout fixes that address touch target sizes, font sizes, and navigation behaviour on mobile devices improve the experience for all mobile users, not just those with disabilities. The overlap between accessibility requirements and mobile usability best practice is substantial, and fixing one typically improves the other.
Before Most responsive design work focuses on a desktop breakpoint and a mobile breakpoint. The mid-range, tablets in landscape, large phones, and non-standard screen widths, is where layouts most commonly fail. Text overlaps, navigation collapses incorrectly, buttons become too small to tap, and content reflows in ways that break the reading order. These failures are invisible to developers testing on standard viewport sizes and only surface when a user is on a real device.
After An accessibility audit report that classifies issues by WCAG criterion, documents the fix, and includes tested colour values is a reference document your development team can use to prevent regressions in future work. Accessibility improvements that are documented are more likely to be maintained than those that are applied silently.
How it works

Process

  1. 01

    Scope and Discovery

    We review your site architecture, identify every page type requiring testing, and agree the audit scope. For large sites, we agree a representative sample approach that covers all interaction patterns and page templates. We confirm your regulatory context, whether PSBAR applies, whether the Equality Act is the operative framework, and whether there are any sector-specific requirements. This takes two to three days.

  2. 02

    Automated Scan and Manual Audit

    We run the automated scan across all in-scope pages and conduct the manual audit in parallel: screen reader testing, keyboard navigation testing, colour contrast analysis, ARIA review, and responsive layout testing. The manual audit typically takes one to two weeks depending on site complexity.

  3. 03

    Audit Report Delivery

    We deliver the written accessibility audit report, classified by severity and WCAG criterion, with remediation recommendations for every identified issue. We present the findings in a call and answer questions from your development team before remediation begins.

  4. 04

    Remediation and Retest

    We implement the fixes or work alongside your development team to implement them, depending on your preference and internal resource. After remediation, we conduct a full retest against the original audit scope and issue the retest confirmation report. The confirmation report is the document that goes into your accessibility statement.

Request an Accessibility Audit →
Common questions

FAQ

Does the Equality Act 2010 require UK websites to be accessible?

The Equality Act 2010 requires service providers to make reasonable adjustments to avoid placing disabled people at a substantial disadvantage. A website that cannot be used by a blind person using a screen reader, or by someone who cannot use a mouse, is likely to be considered a failure to make reasonable adjustments. The Act does not specify a technical standard, but WCAG 2.1 AA is the accepted baseline for what constitutes a reasonable adjustment for web accessibility. If your site has never been tested against that standard, you do not know whether it meets the legal requirement.

What does PSBAR require for public sector websites?

The Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) Accessibility Regulations 2018 require that public sector websites meet WCAG 2.1 AA, publish an accessibility statement that accurately reflects the current compliance status, and review that statement regularly. The regulations apply to websites and mobile applications published on or after 23 September 2018, with phased enforcement for older sites. PSBAR is enforced by the Government Digital Service, and the accessibility statement must be truthful about known failures rather than a generic claim of compliance.

What is the difference between an automated scan and a manual audit?

Automated accessibility testing tools can identify approximately 30 to 40 percent of WCAG failures reliably. The issues they find are real and worth fixing, but the issues they miss are often the ones with the greatest impact on users. Screen reader compatibility, keyboard interaction logic, focus management, and the correctness of ARIA implementations all require a human tester to evaluate. A manual audit takes longer and costs more than a scan, but it finds the issues that actually affect disabled users day to day.

How long does an accessibility audit and remediation take?

A full audit of a website with ten to twenty distinct page types typically takes two to three weeks from scope agreement to report delivery. Remediation time depends on the number and severity of issues found and whether your development team is handling the fixes or we are. A site with moderate accessibility debt typically takes four to six weeks from audit report to retest confirmation. Sites with extensive custom JavaScript components, complex navigation structures, or large codebases with no prior accessibility consideration take longer.

What does an accessibility statement need to say?

An accessibility statement for a public sector site under PSBAR must state which standard you are claiming compliance with, identify any known areas of non-compliance and the reasons for them, provide contact details for users who encounter accessibility barriers, and describe the enforcement procedure available to users who are not satisfied with the response. A statement that claims full WCAG 2.1 AA compliance without a supporting audit is not a truthful statement. We help you write an accurate statement based on the actual audit findings.

Our team

The people behind the work

Not a black box. Real specialists you can call, with their names on the work.

Niraj Raut

Niraj Raut

Founder — Ecommerce SEO
Keshab Joshi

Keshab Joshi

PPC Expert
Hawrry Bhattarai

Hawrry Bhattarai

Google Ads Expert
Arogya Rijal

Arogya Rijal

SaaS SEO Expert
About Us →
Start here

Accessibility Is a Legal Requirement, Not a Nice-to-Have

One in five people in the UK has a disability. The Equality Act 2010 and PSBAR set the legal baseline. An accessibility audit tells you exactly where your site stands and what it needs. We test it properly, fix what is broken, and give you the documentation to prove it.

Request an Accessibility Audit →