Insights
How do you choose a government website redesign company before the ADA Title II deadline?
What good looks likeBy Whitelam Media7 min read
All insightsEvery vendor bidding on your city, county or district website will say its work is accessible. Here is how to check that claim, what to put in the contract and which red flags should rule a bid out before April 2027 or April 2028.
Your RFP is out and bids are coming in. Every vendor will say its sites are accessible. This guide shows a city, county or special district how to check that claim before signing. If you still need to write the RFP, start with our county website RFP guide. For budgets, see what WCAG 2.1 AA costs for a city or county website.
First, the dates. In April 2026 the Department of Justice issued an interim final rule that gives public entities an extra year. Large entities now must comply by April 26, 2027, and smaller entities and special districts by April 26, 2028. The standard is still WCAG 2.1 Level AA. A redesign, content move and staff training take months, so the vendor you pick this year decides whether you make it.
Ask every vendor for proof of accessible work.
"WCAG compliant" in a bid tells you nothing. Ask for three things.
- A sample audit. A redacted report from a real audit. Each issue should name the WCAG success criterion it fails, the page it was found on, how it was found and how to fix it. If the sample is a printout from a free scanner, the vendor is not doing the testing.
- An Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR). Vendors that sell to government commonly create an ACR using the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT). Ask for one covering the CMS and templates they plan to give you, and read the "Partially Supports" rows and remarks. A report where every row says "Supports" deserves a follow-up question.
- A testing walkthrough. Ask them to test a page live. Someone should use only the keyboard: tab through the menu, open a dropdown, fill in a form and watch where focus goes. Then repeat it with a screen reader such as NVDA or JAWS on Windows, VoiceOver on a Mac or iPhone or TalkBack on Android. Ask who does this testing and on which pages.
Scanners miss problems only a person finds, such as a form that makes sense to the eye and none to a screen reader. A vendor that tests only with a scanner hands you a site that passes the scan and still fails residents.
Why an overlay widget will not make your site meet WCAG 2.1 AA.
Some bids include an accessibility widget: a toolbar icon that lets visitors change text size or contrast. These overlays are third-party scripts that change the front end of a site as it loads. The same page notes that automatic alt text and automatic form repairs are not reliable, that overlays do not fix PDFs or media files and that "full WCAG compliance cannot be achieved with an overlay."
Regulators have noticed. In April 2025 the Federal Trade Commission approved a final order requiring the overlay maker accessiBe to pay $1 million over claims that its AI product could make websites compliant.
If a bid leans on a widget to meet the rule, score it down. Accessibility lives in the code, the templates and the content your staff publish.
Can your staff publish accessible pages themselves?
The site stays accessible only if the clerk who uploads the agenda and the officer who posts the event flyer can do it right without calling the vendor. Ask for a demo of the editor your staff will use, and check:
- Alt text is required. An image will not save without a description, with an option to mark it decorative.
- Headings are controlled. Editors pick from set heading levels and cannot fake a heading with big bold text.
- Colors are locked. Staff choose from brand colors that already pass contrast.
- PDFs and agendas have a plan. Ask how agendas, minutes and packets will be published: as accessible PDFs, web pages or both. Old documents and agenda software are their own problem, covered in old PDFs, agendas and vendor tools under Title II.
Ask what training is included and whether staff get a written guide. On the sites we build with Payload CMS, required alt text and fixed heading levels are set in the editor itself, so the rules hold even when staff change.
Who keeps the site accessible after launch?
Every new page, PDF and form can bring a new problem. Ask each vendor:
- How often do you check the site? Monthly suits a public site that changes every week.
- What do you check? A scan of every page, plus manual checks of new templates and the most used pages.
- Who fixes what you find, and how fast? Get the turnaround in writing.
- What report do we get? A city manager or board should be able to read it.
This is the work our ADA website compliance program covers: audits, fixes, new accessible sites and monthly checks at fixed prices.
Price, timeline and who owns the site.
Price. Ask for a fixed price per phase with a written scope: how many templates, how many pages moved, how many PDFs fixed and what counts as extra. Hourly billing with no cap puts the risk on you.
Timeline. Ask for a dated plan that works back from your deadline: discovery, design, build, content move, an audit before launch, training and a buffer of a few months. Launching in the deadline month leaves no room to slip.
Ownership. The contract should say you own the code, the content, the domain and the hosting accounts. Ask what you get if you leave: a full content export, the code and the admin logins.
Red flags in a bid, and a scorecard to compare vendors.
Use the dates from the rule: April 26, 2027 for entities serving 50,000 or more, and April 26, 2028 for smaller entities and special districts. An ACR rates each criterion as Supports, Partially Supports, Does Not Support or Not Applicable. And remember the $1 million FTC order against an overlay maker when a bid offers a widget. Score each bid against this sheet.
| What to check | Ask the vendor for | A good answer | A red flag |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accessibility proof | A redacted sample audit and an ACR | Issues tied to WCAG 2.1 AA criteria; ACR rows marked Supports, Partially Supports, Does Not Support or Not Applicable, with remarks | "Fully compliant" with no report behind it |
| Testing method | A live keyboard and screen reader walkthrough | A named person tests named pages with NVDA, JAWS, VoiceOver or TalkBack | A scanner score only |
| Overlay widget | Whether a widget is part of the plan | No widget; fixes made in code, templates and content | A widget sold as the fix, the kind of claim behind the $1 million FTC order |
| Staff publishing | A demo of the editor staff will use | Required alt text, set heading levels, locked colors, a plan for PDFs | A free-form editor and optional training |
| After launch | The check schedule and a sample report | Monthly checks and fix times in writing | An annual review or nothing |
| Timeline | A dated plan with a buffer | Launch months before April 26, 2027 (50,000 or more) or April 26, 2028 (smaller and special districts) | Launch in the deadline month |
| Price | A fixed price per phase | Written scope for templates, pages and PDFs | Hourly with no cap |
| Ownership | The exit clause in the contract | You own code, content, domain and accounts | A proprietary platform with export fees |
What to do this week.
Send every shortlisted vendor the same list: sample audit, ACR, a live testing walkthrough, an editor demo, a sample monthly report, a dated plan and the ownership clause. The answers will sort the bids quickly. No vendor can promise you will never get a complaint. You can pick one whose work you can check.
For an outside view of your current site, our free Website Health Check shows how outdated and exposed it is. You can also see how we work with public bodies and the firms that serve them on our government website design page, or book a call.
