Reviewed November 5, 2026

Your Accessibility Statement Is Evidence: Write It Like You Know That

A website accessibility statement should state the conformance target, usually WCAG 2.1 or 2.2 Level AA, the date of the last evaluation, the evaluation method, known limitations described honestly, and a contact method for accessibility problems that actually reaches someone. Statements claiming full compliance or 100 percent accessibility while barriers exist create evidence against the business rather than protection.

Somewhere in your footer sits a page your marketing team wrote in an afternoon, full of warm commitments and the phrase fully compliant. A plaintiff's expert will read that page aloud someday if it helps them, and the gap between its claims and a ten minute scan of your checkout is the whole exhibit.

The statement is not a liability shield and it is not decoration. Written accurately, it is genuinely useful to disabled customers and mildly helpful legally. Written as advertising, it is a signed confession with better typography.

What an honest statement contains

Name the standard and the level you target, WCAG 2.1 AA remains the version the DOJ's Title II rule references and the one most often cited for private businesses, with 2.2 AA a reasonable current target. Give the date the site was last evaluated and by what method, audit, testing with assistive technology, or a third party review, in plain words.

List known limitations without flinching: the legacy PDF library not yet remediated, the third party booking widget outside your control with the alternative you offer instead. Specific limitations read as competence. A statement with no limitations, on a real commercial website, reads as fiction to anyone who tests websites for a living.

The claims to take out today

Delete absolute language: fully accessible, 100 percent compliant, ADA certified, guaranteed. There is no ADA certification for websites, no body issues one, and any vendor implying otherwise is selling the exact artifact that becomes evidence later. Promises about continuous monitoring by an overlay or a plugin belong in the same deletion, because they claim a state a scan can check.

Also remove the feedback route that goes nowhere. A statement inviting accessibility reports to an unmonitored inbox, or a contact form that is itself inaccessible, is worse than no invitation. The feedback channel is part of the claim. Test it the way you would test the checkout, because a plaintiff's team will.

The statement as an operating document

Tie the statement to your remediation log. When a listed limitation gets fixed, update the statement and its date. When an audit finds a new limitation, add it. A statement whose date advances and whose limitations shrink over time is a picture of a working program, and it is the rare legal document that gets more valuable the more honestly it is maintained.

Assign it an owner. Statements rot because nobody's job includes them, and the page quietly keeps last year's date and a departed vendor's promises. One named person, one quarterly glance, and the page tells the truth, which is the only version of it that ever helps.

Frequently asked questions

Is an accessibility statement legally required for a business website?

For private businesses in the US there is no general federal requirement to publish one, though some contracts, public sector rules, and European requirements effectively require statements. Many businesses publish one voluntarily because it helps users and documents their program.

Should my statement say we are fully ADA compliant?

No. Absolute claims are almost never accurate for a live website, there is no ADA certification to claim, and an overstated statement can be used as evidence that the business misrepresented its accessibility. State your target standard, your evaluation date, and your known limitations instead.

What standard should the statement cite, WCAG 2.1 or 2.2?

WCAG 2.1 Level AA is the version referenced in the DOJ's Title II rule and most US settlement agreements. Targeting WCAG 2.2 AA is also defensible since it builds on 2.1. What matters is citing the one you actually test against, and testing against it.

How often should an accessibility statement be updated?

Update it whenever an evaluation happens, a listed limitation is fixed, or the feedback contact changes, and review it at least quarterly. The date on the statement should reflect real evaluation activity, not just a page edit.