Does Your Government Website Meet the 2027 ADA Rules? Do This First

A government website is more than a place to post announcements. People use it to pay bills, apply for permits, find public services, watch meetings, and get help. If a page, form, or mobile app isn’t accessible, someone may be blocked from doing something important.

The U.S. Department of Justice’s ADA Title II web accessibility rule gives state and local governments a technical standard to work toward: WCAG 2.1 Level AA. For many cities, counties, and other public entities, the compliance deadline is April 26, 2027. That date was extended by a year in 2026, but it’s still close enough that planning now matters.

The useful first move isn’t buying a widget or redesigning the homepage. It’s finding out what you’re responsible for and where people are running into barriers.

First, check which deadline applies

Under the current rule, the deadline generally depends on the public entity’s population:

The population calculation isn’t based on how many people work for an agency or visit its website. A department or library that’s part of a larger government may use that government’s population. The DOJ’s first-steps guidance explains how to determine the deadline, including how the rule applies to government units within a larger entity.

The April 2026 extension changed the dates, not the technical standard. The Federal Register notice sets out the extension. Because requirements and guidance can change, confirm your deadline and obligations with your legal or ADA coordinator before making decisions based on a summary.

Do this first: make an inventory

Before anyone can fix a barrier, your team needs a reasonably clear picture of what it has. Start with a simple inventory of websites, mobile apps, documents, and services your entity provides or makes available.

Include more than the main city or county website. Think about department microsites, public meeting platforms, online forms, payment tools, permit portals, library catalogs, and apps supplied by vendors. The rule can cover content and apps provided through contractual or other arrangements, so “a contractor built it” doesn’t automatically take it out of scope.

For each item, note:

• What it does: Is it used to apply for a service, pay a bill, submit a request, or get essential information?
• Who manages it: Which staff member or vendor updates the system and its content?
• What it contains: Pages, forms, PDFs, videos, images, or interactive tools?
• How important it is: Is it central to a service people need, or used regularly by the public?
• What’s known about access: Have residents reported problems? Has anyone tested it?

Keep the first pass manageable. A spreadsheet that names the services and their owners is more useful than a perfect inventory that never gets started. The DOJ’s planning guidance includes additional questions to help identify websites, apps, and third-party content.

Test actual tasks, not just the homepage

An accessibility review should look at the tasks people come to complete. Can someone find a meeting agenda, navigate a form with a keyboard, understand an error message, and submit the form without a mouse? Can a screen reader identify a link’s purpose or the label for a required field?

These are practical questions as well as technical ones. A page can look tidy and still be difficult to use with assistive technology. A map may have no useful text alternative. A form might rely on color alone to flag an error. A PDF may be an image of text that a screen reader can’t interpret.

Review representative pages and common components, including:

• Navigation, headings, and page structure
• Keyboard access and visible focus
• Text and background contrast
• Form labels, instructions, and error messages
• Images, captions, and other non-text content
• PDFs and documents people need to use current services
• Third-party tools and mobile apps

Automated scanners can help identify some issues, but they can’t assess every requirement or tell you whether a process makes sense for someone using assistive technology. Combine automated checks with hands-on testing and, where possible, input from people with disabilities. The W3C’s evaluation resources are a useful starting point.

Turn the findings into a remediation plan

An audit is useful when it leads to decisions. For each issue, record what’s wrong, where it appears, who can address it, and how you’ll verify the fix. Then prioritize based on the consequences for visitors.

A sensible starting order often looks like this:

1. Key public services: Fix barriers in the pages and tools people need to apply, register, pay, or request help.
2. Shared site components: Address navigation, templates, headers, and forms that affect many pages at once.
3. Frequently used content: Review current documents, notices, and meeting materials people rely on.
4. Less-used and older content: Assess it against the rule’s specific exceptions rather than assuming all old material is exempt.

The rule includes limited exceptions for certain content. For example, some qualifying preexisting documents or archived material may be treated differently. But an exception isn’t a reason to overlook content that people still need to access, and other ADA obligations may still apply. Review the DOJ’s fact sheet on the rule and consult your legal or accessibility lead about how it applies to your content.

A plan should also name who owns the work. Accessibility involves more than web developers. Communications staff publish pages and files; procurement teams select vendors; program staff understand how services work; and leadership can set expectations and allocate time.

Include vendors and content practices in the plan

A website can be carefully built and still become harder to use as new content is added. A staff member might upload a poorly structured document or publish an image without a meaningful text alternative. A third-party reservation or payment system may introduce barriers beyond the main website.

Ask vendors specific questions about the tools and services they provide. What accessibility information can they share? How are issues reported and fixed? Who tests updates? The public entity remains responsible for its obligations even when a vendor does the work, so contracts and oversight deserve a place in the plan.

For your own team, set practical publishing standards. Make it clear how to add headings, write link text, describe informative images, caption videos, and check documents before publishing. Then decide how new pages and changes will be reviewed. Accessibility works better as part of normal website upkeep than as a one-time cleanup before a deadline.

Make your website easier to maintain

A durable government website should make accessible publishing easier for staff, not depend on one person remembering every detail. Clear templates, a manageable content structure, and training can reduce repeated mistakes and make updates less stressful.

That’s part of how we think about accessible website design at Snowberry Media: accessibility belongs in decisions about structure, design, development, and content, not just in a final scan. Our approach to website management focuses on helping teams update and grow their sites after launch.

No single scan or tool can certify that every page and service is accessible. A sound next step is a scoped review that identifies your highest-impact barriers, gives your team a prioritized remediation plan, and establishes a process for checking work as the site changes. That gives you something more useful than a deadline on a calendar: a clear picture of what to do next.

If you’re sorting through a government website audit or planning a redesign, talk with Snowberry Media. We can help you assess the website and plan an accessible, practical path forward.