How to Fix Section 508 Accessibility Issues on Your Website

Section 508 website remediation — a practical action plan

This page shows a tight, actionable process to find, fix and verify Section 508 accessibility issues on public websites and web apps. It assumes you must meet federal accessibility expectations (the technical baseline used by most agencies is the WCAG success criteria) and need a repeatable remediation workflow for developers, QA and procurement.

Introduction

Remediation is not a single task — it is a sequence: discover, prioritise, fix, test and document. Use automated tools to find bulk problems, manual checks to confirm user impact, and a risk-based prioritisation so teams fix what matters most first.

Plan and prioritise your remediation

Start with a short remediation plan that all stakeholders can follow. The plan should define scope, success criteria, timelines and ownership.

• Inventory: list pages, templates, widgets, third-party embeds and documents.
• Baseline audit: run automated scans then sample manual reviews across key user journeys.
• Scope and deadlines: split work into phases (critical, high, medium, low).
• Assign owners: developer, tester, content editor, legal or procurement contact.

Quick prioritisation matrix

Priority	Impact	Example issues
Critical	Prevents access or transactions	Missing keyboard access, invisible forms, inaccessible PDFs for applications
High	Major user friction	Poor focus order, missing labels, no captions on essential video
Medium	Impacts some users; workarounds exist	Color contrast failures, decorative images with live alt text

Common Section 508 issues and how to fix them

The sections below list often-seen problems and specific remediation steps developers or content editors can use.

Keyboard access and focus

Issue: Controls are not reachable or focus is hidden. Fix: Ensure all interactive elements are reachable by Tab, provide visible focus styles, and avoid tabindex values greater than 0. Test: keyboard-only navigation across complete user flows.

Images and non-text content

Issue: Missing or incorrect alternative text. Fix: Add descriptive alt attributes for informative images; use empty alt (alt=“”) for decorative images. Test: Turn off images and confirm the content still makes sense.

Forms and labels

Issue: Inputs without labels or confusing error messages. Fix: Use elements correctly, associate with inputs via for/id, provide aria-describedby for errors, and give clear inline validation. Test: Fill forms with assistive tech and keyboard only.

Documents and PDFs

Issue: Uploaded PDFs or Office files are inaccessible. Fix: Provide accessible HTML alternatives where possible; if PDFs are required, tag the PDF, add a logical reading order, and include searchable text. Test: Open in a screen reader and confirm headings and reading order.

Video, audio and captions

Issue: Media lacks captions or transcripts. Fix: Add accurate captions for video and transcripts for audio; provide audio descriptions when visual content is essential. Test: Play media with sound muted and follow the content using captions or transcript.

Colour contrast and visual presentation

Issue: Low contrast reduces readability. Fix: Increase foreground/background contrast to meet WCAG AA ratios or adjust design tokens. Test: Use contrast tools and inspect with the site’s default zoom level.

ARIA and semantic HTML misuse

Issue: Incorrect ARIA can break accessibility. Fix: Prefer semantic elements (button, nav, main, form). Apply ARIA only to fill gaps and follow specifications. Test: Verify with a screen reader and remove ARIA that duplicates native semantics.

Testing, validation and documentation

Combine automated scanning with human-led checks and assistive technology testing for a reliable pass/fail decision.

• Automated tools: run scanners to find obvious failures, but treat results as a starting point.
• Manual checks: keyboard-only, screen reader runs (NVDA, VoiceOver), and mobile testing are essential.
• User testing: include people who use assistive tech where practical for high-impact pages.
• Regression testing: include accessibility checks in your CI/CD pipeline to prevent reintroducing defects.

Documenting compliance and progress

Create a remediation log with: issue ID, page URL, WCAG success criterion mapping, priority, owner, remediation notes, and verification evidence. Use screenshots, code snippets and test commands as evidence for each closed item.

Conclusion

Fixing Section 508 issues is a repeatable process: plan, prioritise by impact, apply targeted fixes, then validate and document. Focus first on critical user journeys and regress regularly to keep the site accessible as it changes.

FAQs

How long does remediation usually take?

Time varies with site size and complexity. Small sites may clear critical issues in days; large apps often need phased sprints over weeks or months.

Can automated tools alone ensure Section 508 compliance?

No. Automated tools catch many problems but they miss semantic issues, context-dependent alt text and keyboard logic. Always follow up with manual and assistive-technology checks.

Should I prioritise pages or components?

Prioritise key user journeys (login, forms, payments, applications) and shared components used across pages. Fixing components reduces repeated defects site-wide.

What evidence should I keep for audits or procurement?

Keep a remediation log, screenshots, test scripts and VPAT-style mappings that show which success criteria were tested and by whom. Include dates and verification steps.