How KC Web Specialists Improved Website Accessibility Using WCAG 2.1 AA

At KC Web Specialists, LLC, we applied our website accessibility improvement process to our own website, kcwebspecialists.com. We used WCAG 2.1 Level AA as our scanning target, addressed reported errors and warnings, and used several testing tools to examine the site. We also manually reviewed suspected false positives against WCAG 2.1 AA and published an accessibility policy.

The outcome is a website we have worked to make more accessible and a public commitment to keep improving it. We are continuing to monitor for accessibility issues because people with disabilities deserve access to our business, too.

Why we started with our own website

A business website helps people understand services, ask questions and decide whether to contact a company. An accessibility barrier can interrupt that process before a conversation ever begins. For someone who uses assistive technology or navigates differently, a website that looks fine to its owner may still be difficult to use.

As a Kansas City-area web company based in Overland Park, we wanted to put the same attention into our own website that we encourage local business owners to give theirs. This was an in-house accessibility project with a clear goal: identify barriers, address the findings and make accessibility an ongoing responsibility.

Using WCAG 2.1 AA to guide the scans

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines provide technical criteria for evaluating web accessibility. We selected WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the target for the initial PowerMapper scan. That gave us a defined reference for the automated checks rather than relying on how the website looked.

A scanning target is not a statement that every applicable requirement has been verified. It identifies the standard we wanted to measure against and helps explain the scope of the work.

How PowerMapper OnDemand Suite shaped the project

PowerMapper OnDemand Suite was instrumental in turning the project into a practical list of findings to investigate. Its web testing tools helped us identify reported accessibility concerns and organize the work around those findings.

We first scanned kcwebspecialists.com against our WCAG 2.1 AA target. We then worked through the errors and warnings, making corrections where remediation was required. This gave the team a concrete starting point for the project.

The scanner helped us find where to look. Our team still had to evaluate the findings and do the work. A report is a useful tool for improvement; it is not a substitute for professional judgment.

Checking the work with additional tools

Our project also used ARC Toolkit, axe DevTools, Lighthouse, Silktide and WAVE. Using several tools gave us additional ways to examine the website and compare their reported findings.

We worked through all reported errors and warnings, correcting confirmed issues. Where a tool continued to flag something we believed was not an actual issue, we checked it manually rather than treating the warning as the final answer.

Manually reviewing suspected false positives

After the remediation work, we manually examined the tool-reported findings we believed were false positives. Those checks used WCAG 2.1 Level AA to determine whether the flagged items were actual accessibility issues.

That distinction matters: WCAG 2.1 AA was our scanning target, while WCAG 2.1 AA was the reference for this manual review. Reviewing suspected false positives is valuable, but it is a narrower activity than a complete manual audit against WCAG 2.2 AA.

W3C guidance on evaluation tools explains that automated tools have limits and some checks require human evaluation. Our experience reinforced the importance of understanding a finding before deciding how to resolve it.

Making our commitment public with an accessibility policy

As part of the project, we compiled and added an accessibility policy to our website. Publishing the policy gives visitors a place to learn about our commitment and contact us if they experience an accessibility difficulty.

A policy does not repair a barrier by itself. Its value is making accessibility a visible responsibility and providing a way for people to raise concerns that testing may not identify.

The results and what they mean

• We completed accessibility improvement work on our own business website using WCAG 2.1 AA as the scanning target.
• We addressed reported errors and warnings across the testing process through corrections and manual review of suspected false positives.
• We manually checked suspected false positives against WCAG 2.1 AA.
• We published an accessibility policy and continue to monitor the website for ongoing issues.

The major outcome is that our actions demonstrate accessibility is important to KC Web Specialists, LLC. We invested effort in our own website, applied testing tools thoughtfully and made our commitment public. This is practical experience we bring to conversations with business owners about their websites.

We describe the desired outcome as a more accessible website. The completed remediation, manual review of disputed findings and published policy support that commitment. Continued evaluation helps us identify where further improvement may be needed.

Why we avoid a blanket ADA compliant claim

ADA compliance is a legal concept; WCAG conformance is a technical determination. Neither is established simply by clearing a scanner’s findings. The U.S. Department of Justice’s accessibility guidance cautions that a clean automated report does not necessarily mean everything is accessible.

For this project, the accurate message is that we made accessibility improvements, reviewed findings and continue to monitor the site. We want business owners to understand the work performed and its limits instead of relying on a permanent compliance label.

Keeping accessibility part of website care

Websites change. A new page, form, image or plugin can introduce something that deserves another look. That is why our commitment extends beyond the original round of repairs. We continue to focus on monitoring our site and responding to accessibility concerns.

Accessibility should be part of the way a business maintains its website. The goal is to keep finding and reducing barriers as content and technology change.

What this means for your Kansas City business

You do not need to interpret a long technical report on your own. You need to understand which findings deserve attention, what work may be necessary and where to begin.

KC Web Specialists helps Kansas City-area businesses take that first step. Our own project shows how we approach the process: use a defined standard, investigate reported findings, make improvements and keep accessibility in view.

Request your free website accessibility evaluation. The initial evaluation is a starting point for understanding potential barriers and next steps. It is not a full-site audit or compliance certification.

Questions about this accessibility case study

Which tools did KC Web Specialists use

We used PowerMapper OnDemand Suite, ARC Toolkit, axe DevTools, Lighthouse, Silktide and WAVE, followed by manual review of suspected false positives.

Was every part of the project tested against WCAG 2.1 AA

WCAG 2.2 AA was the scanning target. Our manual review of suspected false positives used WCAG 2.1 AA. This case study does not claim a complete manual WCAG 2.2 AA audit.

Does adding an accessibility policy make a website accessible

A policy communicates a commitment and gives visitors a feedback route. Improving accessibility also requires examining the website and addressing barriers.

How can I start improving my business website

Start by finding out where attention may be needed. Request a free website accessibility evaluation from KC Web Specialists and take the next step toward a more accessible website.