Design digital experiences that more people can actually use.
Accessibility as inclusive product quality — not a compliance checklist. Accessibility audits, WCAG-aware refinement, accessible components, and remediation guidance that's actionable for design and dev — and usable for real users.
Issues fixed
124
H1 + H2
Contrast pass
98%
AA threshold
Keyboard path
Full
All flows
Keyboard + focus paths — all flows
Screen reader semantics + ARIA
Contrast, type, spacing tokens
Component states + form errors
Audit Coverage
124
RankedSeverity H1 / H2 / H3 prioritised
Keyboard UX
100%
Flow coverageFocus order + skip-links validated
At a Glance
Six Disciplines, One Inclusive Product.
Accessibility Design isn't an audit PDF and a compliance badge. It's the six-discipline system that turns findings into inclusive product quality — implementation-ready for design and dev, usable for real users.
Accessibility Reviews
Design + code-level audit against WCAG 2.2 AA, manual screen-reader testing, keyboard path validation — findings ranked by severity and impact.
Inclusive Interface Design
Inclusive design improvements across flows, screens, and interactions — accessibility treated as usability, not as compliance tax.
WCAG-Aware Improvements
Success criteria translated into practical design moves — contrast, focus, semantics, timing, error handling, resize behaviour, reduced motion.
Accessible Components
Component-level accessibility — buttons, forms, dialogs, tables, menus — states, roles, and ARIA semantics designed right and reused consistently.
Remediation Guidance
Actionable remediation direction per finding — what to change, where, how, and what to test. Dev-pickable, not lawyer-pickable.
Readiness for Design & Dev
Handoff-ready accessibility spec — tokens, component rules, interaction requirements, test scripts — so design and dev ship the fix, not argue about it.
When You Need This
Seven Signals You Need Accessibility Design.
If any of these are true, the conversation isn't about checking compliance boxes — it's about making the product usable for the people currently getting stuck.
Your product has usability barriers for some users
Screen readers get stuck. Keyboard users can't complete flows. Low-contrast buttons vanish. Real users are hitting walls — you just don't see the tickets because they don't come in.
Accessibility was never designed into the interface
Product shipped. Accessibility got bolted on later. Findings pile up because the patterns weren't accessible from the start — now every screen is a remediation project.
Your team needs a clearer remediation path
You have an audit. Great. Now what? Findings without severity. Severity without priority. Priority without implementation direction. The audit is a PDF, not a plan.
Your design system lacks accessibility consistency
Three button variants, three focus behaviours. Two modal patterns, one with a focus trap. Drift at the component level = audit findings at the page level, forever.
Your dashboard or portal needs inclusive interaction
Data grids that only work with a mouse. Forms that error silently. Modals that trap focus in the wrong place. Admin apps hit accessibility gaps fastest — and users rely on them daily.
You want to reduce risk and improve readiness
Compliance deadlines loom. Enterprise procurement asks. WCAG questions in RFPs. You need accessibility on firmer ground — not because it's trendy, but because it's required.
Your team needs accessibility support before redesign or dev
About to redesign. About to re-platform. About to ship a new feature. The right time to design accessibility in is before engineering — not after.
What This Covers
Practical Accessibility Delivery — Not a Compliance PDF.
Eight disciplines working together as one inclusive product system. Each produces artefacts designers pick up and developers ship — not findings that sit in Notion.
WCAG 2.2 AA audit combining automated tooling with manual review — keyboard testing, screen-reader walkthroughs, focus order, semantic structure, ranked by severity.
Core Use Cases
Five Engagement Patterns for Accessibility That Actually Ships.
Accessibility Audits & Reviews
Leadership wants 'an accessibility report'. Engineering wants a list of things to fix. Legal wants WCAG conformance. Nobody has a single document that answers all three.
Best for
Teams who need to understand where the accessibility gaps actually are — before redesigning, before procurement, before a compliance deadline.
Outcome
WCAG 2.2 AA audit combining automated + manual review. Ranked backlog (H1 / H2 / H3). Dev remediation notes. Design refinements. Single document, three audiences.
In one line
"Findings without priorities are just anxiety in PDF form."
Goal → Solution
Start From the User — Not the Checklist.
"We need accessibility" isn't a goal. "Our enterprise RFP asks about WCAG conformance and our screen-reader users can't complete checkout" is. Outcome first — accessibility plan follows.
If you need
Need to understand current accessibility gaps
We deliver
Accessibility audit and review — WCAG 2.2 AA audit, manual testing, ranked backlog by severity and impact
If you need
Need more inclusive components and screens
We deliver
Accessible design refinement — inclusive interaction patterns, contrast + focus + state fixes at token + component layer
If you need
Need a clearer remediation path
We deliver
Accessibility remediation planning — ranked roadmap, sprint-sequenced, design + dev direction per finding, acceptance criteria
If you need
Need better accessibility in a dashboard or product flow
We deliver
Product accessibility improvement — keyboard grids, focus management, accessible tables, screen-reader flows
If you need
Need accessibility built into reusable UI patterns
We deliver
Accessible design system support — tokens, component spec, ARIA + keyboard behaviour, Storybook a11y tests
If you need
Need lower risk and stronger readiness
We deliver
Audit + remediation + implementation guidance — WCAG conformance, handoff-ready spec, acceptance testing framework
Why Accessibility Work Often Fails
The Gap Isn't Awareness — It's Actionability.
Most failing accessibility projects don't fail because teams don't care. They fail because the audit arrived as a PDF nobody can pick up — findings without priorities, priorities without direction, direction without acceptance criteria.
What goes wrong
- Accessibility treated as a final checklist — boarded on after engineering shipped
- Audits find problems but offer weak next steps — PDF with 200 findings, no plan
- Components stay inconsistent — three button variants, three focus behaviours
- Accessibility fixes happen page by page — no system thinking, no component-layer fix
- Design and development handoff is unclear — designers say 'dev will handle it', devs say 'designers should have spec'd it'
- Compliance language dominates — usability doesn't actually improve
- Teams don't know what to fix first — everything is H1 because nothing is
- Screen-reader testing is skipped — automated scans miss the issues real users hit
How Avana Hub fixes it
- Clearer accessibility priorities — ranked by severity + impact + implementation effort
- More actionable remediation direction — per finding: what, where, how, validate
- Stronger component-level consistency — fix the component, every instance benefits
- Inclusive design improvements linked to usability — accessibility as product quality
- Cleaner handoff between design and development — acceptance criteria + test scripts
- Accessibility treated as part of product quality — not as compliance performance
- Structured path from issue to improvement — audit → plan → remediate → verify
- Manual testing layered with automation — screen readers, keyboard, real-device checks
Our Framework
The Avana Hub Accessibility Design Framework.
Five phases — Review → Prioritize → Improve → Systemize → Support. Inclusive, actionable, and designed so accessibility compounds through the design system instead of regressing after every sprint.
Review
Audit + Real-User Testing
WCAG 2.2 AA audit combining automated tooling + manual review. Screen-reader walkthroughs, keyboard testing, focus validation — findings ranked by severity.
Prioritize
Severity + Impact + Effort
Ranked backlog — H1 / H2 / H3 by user impact, mapped against implementation effort. What to fix first, what to fix at the component layer, what can wait.
Improve
Design + Remediation
Inclusive design improvements at flow, screen, and component level. Remediation direction per finding — what to change, where, how, with acceptance criteria.
Systemize
Tokens + Components + Tests
Accessibility baked into the design system — contrast tokens, focus system, accessible component spec, ARIA patterns, Storybook a11y tests wired.
Support
Ongoing Readiness + Review
Quarterly accessibility reviews, new-feature a11y check-ins, design-system governance, and the cadence that keeps accessibility stable as the product grows.
Our Process
Five Steps — From Barrier Audit to Inclusive Readiness.
No audit PDFs that sit in Notion, no vague recommendations. Every engagement runs the same process — diagnose, rank, improve, hand off, support. Measurable at every step.
Review the current experience and accessibility gaps
Audit against WCAG 2.2 AA — automated scans + manual screen-reader + keyboard testing + focus path validation. Findings documented with evidence.
Identify priorities and barrier severity
Ranked backlog (H1 / H2 / H3) by user impact and implementation effort. Component-level vs page-level fixes separated. Sprint-sequenced roadmap.
Improve flows, screens, and components
Inclusive design refinements — contrast, focus, semantics, keyboard behaviour, error recovery. Component-level fixes so pages inherit improvements.
Create remediation-ready guidance for design & dev
Per-finding direction — what to change, where, how, acceptance criteria, screen-reader scripts, Storybook a11y tests. Dev ships without reinterpreting.
Support stronger accessibility readiness over time
Quarterly reviews, new-feature accessibility check-ins, design-system governance, and the cadence that keeps accessibility from regressing every sprint.
Sample Output
What Accessibility Work Actually Ships.
Accessibility gets dismissed as audit PDFs and compliance theatre when the real artefacts aren't shown. These are the deliverables your design and dev teams actually pick up.
H1 — critical
14
H2 — high
32
H3 — medium
56
Component-layer
40%
Real-user tested — not only scanned
WCAG 2.2 AA conformance
H1 + H2 open findings
Keyboard task completion
Support tickets (a11y)
What You Get
Every Engagement Ships Actionable Artefacts.
Not an audit PDF. The ranked backlog, component specs, handoff direction, and acceptance criteria that make accessibility a design + dev deliverable — not a compliance performance.
Accessibility Review + Priorities
WCAG 2.2 AA audit report combining automated + manual findings — ranked by severity + impact + implementation effort.
Issue Severity Mapping
H1 / H2 / H3 backlog, component-layer vs page-layer separation, sprint-sequenced roadmap, evidence screenshots + assistive-tech notes per finding.
Inclusive Design Improvement Direction
Flow-level and screen-level refinements — focus order, tab order, skip-links, error recovery, reduced motion, cognitive load reduction.
Accessible Component Guidance
Component spec covering states, roles, ARIA semantics, keyboard behaviour, focus management — buttons, forms, dialogs, menus, tables, tooltips.
Remediation Recommendations
Per-finding direction — what to change, where, how, acceptance criteria. Actionable for design + dev — not legal-speak.
WCAG-Aware Refinement Notes
WCAG success-criteria translated into practical design moves — contrast, focus, timing, input assistance, screen-reader semantics.
Design-to-Dev Accessibility Handoff
Handoff-ready artefacts — token updates, component rules, interaction requirements, screen-reader scripts, Storybook a11y tests.
Next-Step Recommendations
Ongoing accessibility cadence — quarterly reviews, new-feature a11y check-ins, design-system governance, training for the team.
Engagement Models
Five Ways to Engage Accessibility Design.
Pick the model that matches your stage — audit-first, product improvement, design-system support, remediation planning, or ongoing partnership. Audit is the most requested — most teams need a diagnosis before committing to a remediation spend.
Accessibility Audit & Review
Ideal for: Teams who need a ranked, actionable diagnosis — before redesign, RFP, or deadline
- WCAG 2.2 AA automated + manual audit
- Screen-reader + keyboard testing
- Ranked backlog (H1 / H2 / H3)
- Evidence screenshots + assistive-tech notes
Product / Website Accessibility Improvement
Ideal for: Live products or websites where barriers are hurting usability and adoption
- Inclusive flow + screen refinement
- Contrast + focus + state fixes at token layer
- Accessible interaction patterns
- Before/after validation
Accessible Design System Support
Ideal for: Teams where drift is component-level — fix components once, pages inherit
- Component spec with states + ARIA + keyboard
- Accessibility tokens (contrast + focus)
- Storybook a11y tests wired
- Governance + onboarding guide
Accessibility Remediation Planning
Ideal for: Teams with an existing audit or known issues — need a structured remediation plan
- Findings ranked by severity + effort
- Sprint-sequenced roadmap
- Per-finding design + dev direction
- Acceptance criteria + test scripts
Ongoing Accessibility Support
Ideal for: Teams committing to continuous accessibility readiness as the product evolves
- Quarterly audits + new-feature a11y reviews
- Design-system a11y governance
- Team training + onboarding
- Partnership with design + dev + product
FAQ
Accessibility Design FAQ
Practical questions product, design, and engineering leaders ask before committing to an accessibility engagement.
Still unsure which accessibility engagement fits your product? Let's walk through it.
Related Services
Explore Connected Design, Frontend & Growth Services
Design experiences that more people can actually use.
More inclusive, easier to use, and better prepared for accessible implementation — across products, platforms, and websites. Accessibility as product quality, not compliance performance.
WCAG 2.2
AA 98%
Components
Spec'd
Remediation
Planned