Can monitoring replace a one-time WCAG audit?

No, monitoring is not a substitute for a complete WCAG 2.2 audit. The audit systematically checks all 78 success criteria, including context-dependent aspects no automated tool detects. Monitoring secures the conformance status achieved after the audit on an ongoing basis and identifies regression errors early. Ideally monitoring starts directly after audit remediation is complete. Our Premium packages include an annual full audit.

How quickly does monitoring respond to new barriers?

Automated scans run weekly and detect technical regression errors within seven days. For critical findings — violations of WCAG conformance level A or severe impairments of screen reader operability — you receive a structured notification within 48 hours with description, location and solution proposal. Less critical findings are captured in the monthly monitoring log and summarized in the quarterly report.

How is monitoring connected to our accessibility statement?

Our monitoring reports provide the data foundation for updating your statutory accessibility statement as required by BFSG §14. The law requires the statement to contain the current conformance status, known limitations, planned measures and the date of the last review. We update this information based on monitoring results and keep the date of last review current.

Which pages and paths are covered by monitoring?

At the start of monitoring we jointly define the scope: all representative page types (homepage, product pages, listing pages, detail pages, landing pages) and critical user paths (search, navigation, forms, login, checkout for online shops). Newly added page types can be incorporated into the scan scope on request. We recommend monitoring at least 15 to 20 page types to achieve representative coverage.

Do you also handle the remediation of found barriers?

Yes, on request we handle remediation of identified barriers within a time budget included in the monitoring packages or separately bookable. Small and medium findings (missing alt attribute, label error, contrast issue) can often be resolved within a few hours. Structural barriers (missing focus management, ARIA errors in complex components) are treated as standalone tasks with their own effort budget. Alternatively we coordinate remediation with your own development team.

How does monitoring differ from a WCAG audit?

The WCAG audit is a complete one-time review: all 78 success criteria are systematically tested for a defined page selection, the result is a detailed audit report. Monitoring is the ongoing quality assurance after the audit: automated scans detect regression errors weekly, manual spot checks review new content monthly, quarterly reports document the trend. Audit and monitoring complement each other: the audit creates the baseline, monitoring sustains it.

Accessibility Monitoring: Sustain compliance beyond the initial audit

A one-time WCAG audit captures status at a single point in time. But new content, CMS updates and feature additions continuously introduce new barriers. Our monitoring service watches your website around the clock, alerts you to deviations immediately and proves your BFSG conformance with regular reports.

Request monitoring All services

Automated Scans Manual Spot Checks Monthly Reports

24/7

Automated monitoring

48h

Response time for critical findings

Manual spot checks per year

50+

Projects monitored

Accessibility is not a one-time project milestone but an ongoing quality property of your digital product. The Barrierefreiheitsstärkungsgesetz (BFSG) requires not just a single moment of conformance but lasting compliance. Our monitoring service bridges the gap between the one-time WCAG audit and long-term conformance assurance: automated scans detect technical regression errors within hours, monthly manual spot checks review context-dependent quality, and quarterly reports document conformance status for your compliance management and potential market surveillance authorities.

Why one-time audits are not a lasting solution

After a successful WCAG 2.2 audit and subsequent accessible web development, your website is conformant at a defined point in time. But the everyday reality of a digital product looks different: editors add new content, developers extend features, plugins get updated, CMS versions change. Each of these modifications can introduce new barriers — often unintentional and unnoticed. Evidence shows that websites without continuous monitoring typically accumulate significantly more barriers within six to twelve months after an audit than they had directly after remediation (project experience). Conformance at audit time provides no assurance during ongoing operations.

BFSG obligation: Ongoing, not one-off

The Barrierefreiheitsstärkungsgesetz does not prescribe a snapshot but the lasting conformance of your digital products. Market surveillance authorities can inspect at any time. An outdated audit report does not protect against complaints — a current monitoring record does.

What our monitoring service covers

Our BFSG monitoring combines three complementary testing methods that together ensure comprehensive coverage of all relevant accessibility aspects. Automated scans reliably and quickly detect technical barriers, manual spot checks identify context-dependent quality issues, and structured reporting makes conformance status provable and manageable.

Automated scans

Weekly axe-core and Lighthouse scans of all defined page types and critical user paths. Detected regression errors are classified, compared with the last scan, and reported within 48 hours for critical findings.

Manual spot checks

Monthly manual review of a representative page selection by trained auditors. Focus on areas automated tools cannot cover: understandability of new content, alt text quality, heading hierarchy consistency and new interactive components.

Quarterly reports

Quarterly reports with conformance status, trend development, identified findings and prioritized recommendations. The report serves as compliance evidence for market surveillance authorities and includes an updated WCAG conformance matrix.

Immediate alerting

For critical findings (WCAG conformance level A violated, fundamental screen reader operability impaired), you receive a notification within 48 hours with finding description, affected page and recommended solution path.

Accessibility statement

Updating your accessibility statement as required by BFSG §14 based on monitoring results. The date of the last review is kept current, known limitations are documented and planned measures are communicated transparently.

Screen reader spot checks

Quarterly testing with NVDA and VoiceOver for critical user paths (navigation, search, forms, login). Identification of regression issues that automated scans do not detect, such as changed output order or new ARIA errors.

Process: How continuous monitoring works

Schritt 1

Onboarding and baseline assessment

At the start of the monitoring contract we conduct a complete baseline review. We record all page types and user paths to be monitored, set up automated scan configurations and document the initial state. The baseline serves as the reference for all subsequent comparisons.

What monitoring detects — and what it does not

Transparency about the limits of our monitoring service matters to us so you have realistic expectations. Automated scans reliably detect a defined set of technical barriers: missing alt texts, insufficient color contrasts, missing form labels, invalid ARIA attributes and structural HTML errors. These are precisely the barriers most frequently introduced by new content and code changes (project experience). The manual spot check extends coverage to context-dependent quality issues that no automated tool can detect.

Coverage: Automated vs. manual

What automated scans detect

Automated scans reliably cover technical, rule-based barriers. They form the foundation of continuous monitoring and run weekly across your entire page inventory without manual effort.

Missing or empty alt attributes on images
Insufficient color contrasts (text on background)
Missing or incorrectly linked form labels
Invalid ARIA roles and attributes
Missing page titles and language attributes
Incorrect heading hierarchies (level jumps)
Links without recognizable link text
Form error messages without programmatic association

What manual spot checks add

Manual spot checks close the gaps no automated tool can close. They are conducted monthly by trained auditors and focus on new and changed content.

Understandability and meaningfulness of new alt texts
Logical consistency of heading hierarchy
Understandability of error messages and help texts
Screen reader output of new interactive components
Keyboard navigation through new forms and dialogs
Color contrast review for new design elements and graphics

Monitoring packages: scope and service description

We offer three monitoring packages scaled to the size and complexity of your website and your compliance requirements. All packages include automated scans, manual spot checks and regular reporting. The difference lies in check frequency, page scope and included remediation budget.

Basic monitoring

For smaller websites and landing pages. Monthly automated scans, quarterly manual spot checks (5 pages), semi-annual reports, email alerting for critical findings. Suitable for websites with stable content and few interactive areas.

Standard monitoring

For mid-size corporate websites. Weekly automated scans, monthly manual spot checks (10 pages), quarterly reports with WCAG matrix, 48h alerting, one time budget for immediate remediation of minor findings. Recommended for BFSG-obligated companies.

Premium monitoring

For complex websites, online shops and high-traffic portals. Weekly automated scans, monthly manual spot checks (20+ pages), quarterly screen reader tests, monthly reports, dedicated point of contact, extended remediation budget, annual full audit included.

New WCAG 2.2 criteria in the monitoring focus

Since October 2023 WCAG 2.2 represents the current state of the art. Our monitoring covers all six new AA criteria: Focus Not Obscured (2.4.11), Dragging Movements (2.5.7), Target Size Minimum (2.5.8), Consistent Help (3.2.6), Redundant Entry (3.3.7) and Accessible Authentication (3.3.8). CMS updates and new plugins most frequently violate these newer criteria because many systems are not yet aligned to WCAG 2.2.

The monitoring report: Your compliance record

Our quarterly report is more than a list of findings. It is a structured compliance document containing all relevant information for your internal quality management and for potential review by market surveillance authorities. The report is based on the VPAT format (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) and the structure of EN 301 549, but is designed to be understandable and usable for organizations of all sizes.

Conformance assessment per WCAG 2.2 AA success criterion (passed / failed / not applicable)
Trend comparison: number of open findings compared to the previous quarter
Prioritized findings list with WCAG reference, severity and solution recommendation
Documentation of barriers resolved since the last report
Recommendations for the following quarter with effort estimates
Basis for updating your statutory accessibility statement under BFSG §14

Integration with existing development and editorial processes

BFSG monitoring delivers its full value when integrated into existing workflows rather than running alongside them. We support you in routing monitoring results directly into your ticketing system: new findings are created as prioritized tasks in your Jira, GitHub Issues or Azure DevOps, so your development team can begin remediation immediately without additional communication overhead. For content teams we recommend a short CMS checklist that ensures the most common editorial barriers (missing alt texts, missing heading hierarchy, non-descriptive link text) never arise in the first place. We create this checklist individually based on your website's monitoring findings.

For development teams we recommend integrating automated accessibility tests into the CI/CD pipeline as a complementary measure to external monitoring. axe-core as a linting plugin in the build process prevents known technical barriers from ever reaching production. The external monitoring then catches barriers the automated build check does not detect: context-dependent issues, new content and subtle regression errors. Together both layers form a robust line of defense for lasting accessibility quality. On request we support CI/CD integration setup as part of our developer training.

Monitoring after launch: The right entry point

The optimal time to start monitoring is directly after the successful completion of a WCAG 2.2 audit and remediation. At that point a validated baseline is available, conformance status is documented and monitoring can observe ongoing changes from this clean starting position. We also frequently see organizations start directly with monitoring without a prior full audit. In this case we conduct the baseline review as the first step of the monitoring contract, establishing a clear foundation for all subsequent comparisons.

Monitoring is particularly important for websites that regularly publish new content: news portals, blog sites, product catalogs with frequent assortment expansions and websites with regular campaign or promotion pages. Every new piece of content is a potential entry point for new barriers. Monitoring ensures none of these barriers remain undetected long-term and the website continually meets the requirements of the BFSG and WCAG 2.2. Contact us to discuss the monitoring model that suits your website and receive an individual proposal — we look forward to hearing from you.