Public marketing site · Automated + heuristic evaluation against WCAG 2.2 Level AA.
Automated tools reliably catch roughly a third to a half of WCAG issues. This audit combines the axe-core engine with structural heuristics across 8 representative page templates, and it is an excellent map of the systemic problems — but it is not a substitute for manual keyboard and screen-reader testing, which is required before claiming conformance or finalizing a VPAT.
workzone.com does not currently meet WCAG 2.2 AA. The failures are concentrated and systemic rather than scattered: color contrast from two brand colors, unlabeled fields on the ROI Calculator, and a cluster of issues in the shared header menu. Because most stem from a handful of shared components and design tokens, a focused effort would move the site close to AA across the board. Good foundations are already in place (see “What's working”).
The first three cover the large majority of instances.
White text on the orange #ff4f01 button is 3.29:1 (needs 4.5:1) and the mint-green #29d296 headings are under 2:1. Darkening these two tokens in the design system clears the large majority of contrast failures site-wide.
Nine inputs rely on placeholder text with no <label>. This is the single critical, blocking failure for screen-reader and voice users — add a <label for> (or aria-label) to each.
One component causes three recurring issues: submenu toggle buttons under 24×24px (target size), aria-controls pointing at unverifiable IDs, and duplicate submenu IDs from rendering the menu twice. Fixing this template resolves ~15 flags on every page at once.
One link with no accessible name (blog) and one keyboard-focusable element inside an aria-hidden region (home). Both are quick, self-contained fixes.
Wrap stray content in landmarks (all pages), fix the heading-level skip on pricing, and name the empty table header. Low effort, improves screen-reader navigation.
“Fails” = axe-confirmed violation; “Needs manual review” = axe could not decide automatically. Expand each row for evidence and the fix.
| Issue & fix | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CRITICAL | Duplicate element IDs referenced by ARIA | 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value Level A | 72 | 8/8 | Needs manual review |
The navigation menu is rendered more than once (desktop + mobile), producing duplicate submenu IDs (e.g., sub-menu-3660). When ARIA references a duplicated ID, assistive tech may resolve the wrong element. | |||||
| CRITICAL | ARIA attribute references an ID that can’t be verified | 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value Level A | 24 | 8/8 | Needs manual review |
| CRITICAL | Form fields missing programmatic labels | 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions / 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value Level A | 9 | 1/8 | Fails |
| SERIOUS | Text color contrast below AA threshold | 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) Level AA | 204 | 8/8 | Fails |
| SERIOUS | Touch targets smaller than 24×24px | 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) Level AA | 24 | 8/8 | Fails |
| SERIOUS | Focusable element inside aria-hidden | 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value Level A | 1 | 1/8 | Fails |
| SERIOUS | Link with no accessible name | 2.4.4 Link Purpose / 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value Level A | 1 | 1/8 | Fails |
| MODERATE | Some content not inside a landmark | Best practice (supports 1.3.1) Level — | 8 | 8/8 | Fails |
| MODERATE | Heading levels skip a level | Best practice (supports 1.3.1) Level — | 1 | 1/8 | Fails |
| MINOR | Empty table header cell | Best practice (supports 1.3.1) Level — | 1 | 1/8 | Fails |
Needs-review items excluded from these totals. Click a column header to sort.
| Notes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Blog article /blog/microsoft-project-alternatives/ | 110 | – | 109 | 1 | 105 | 1 h1 · 104 imgs, 0 no-alt · 3 fields labeled |
Home / | 29 | – | 28 | 1 | 24 | 1 h1 · 164 imgs, 0 no-alt · 3 fields labeled |
Industry: Higher Education /industries/higher-education-project-management/ | 26 | – | 25 | 1 | 22 | 1 h1 · 110 imgs, 0 no-alt · 3 fields labeled |
Pricing /pricing/ | 24 | – | 21 | 3 | 18 | 1 h1 · 74 imgs, 0 no-alt · 3 fields labeled |
ROI Calculator (tool) /roi-calculator/ | 21 | 9 | 11 | 1 | 8 | 1 h1 · 74 imgs, 0 no-alt · 12 fields · 9 unlabeled |
Product Tour: Dashboard /product-tour/project-dashboard/ | 19 | – | 18 | 1 | 15 | 1 h1 · 72 imgs, 0 no-alt · 3 fields labeled |
Contact (form) /contact/ | 10 | – | 9 | 1 | 6 | 1 h1 · 78 imgs, 0 no-alt · 9 fields labeled |
Book a Demo (form) /book-demo/ | 10 | – | 9 | 1 | 6 | 1 h1 · 78 imgs, 0 no-alt · 10 fields labeled |
Every page sets <html lang=”en-US”>.
All 8 pages have a single, clear top-level heading.
0 of ~750 images across the sample were missing an alt attribute (quality of the text still warrants a spot check).
No page disables pinch-zoom via the viewport meta tag (supports 1.4.4 / 1.4.10).
Nothing forces a custom tab order, so focus follows a natural sequence.
The Contact and Book-a-Demo forms have properly labeled fields; only the ROI Calculator does not.
A “Skip to content” link exists in the header template.
Each page exposes a <main> region.
We loaded 8 representative page templates (/, /pricing/, /contact/, /book-demo/, /product-tour/project-dashboard/, /industries/higher-education-project-management/, /blog/microsoft-project-alternatives/, /roi-calculator/) in a real Chromium browser and ran the axe-core 4.10.2 engine against the WCAG 2.0/2.1/2.2 A & AA rulesets, plus structural heuristics (language, heading outline, image alt attributes, form labeling, landmarks, viewport zoom, tab order). The WordPress admin bar was excluded so results reflect a public visitor.
Automated testing catches an estimated 30–50% of WCAG issues. It cannot fully judge keyboard-only operation, focus-visibility and order, screen-reader announcement quality, the meaningfulness of alt text and link names, reading order, motion/animation, or content behind forms and logins. A manual assistive-technology pass (keyboard + NVDA/VoiceOver) is required before asserting conformance or publishing a VPAT.
This audit addresses the accessibility gap flagged in the HECVAT (ITAC-05/06/08). Once these issues are remediated and a manual pass is complete, the results can feed a VPAT / ACR (WCAG 2.2 AA & Section 508) to hand to higher-education prospects.
Instance counts reflect this 8-page sample, not the entire site. Because the biggest issues live in shared templates and brand tokens, fixing them corrects many more pages than were scanned.