Generate a WCAG-Compliant Accessibility Statement in 60 Seconds
A statement helps in a lawsuit. Actually being accessible prevents one.
Scan your site free →Why you need an accessibility statement
An accessibility statement is a public, dated document that says (a) which WCAG level your site targets, (b) how a user can report a barrier, (c) the assistive technologies you test against, (d) the limits of your coverage, and (e) what happens if your feedback process fails. The Department of Justice has required defendants in ADA Title III web-accessibility consent decrees to publish one since 2018; the absence of an accessibility statement is now treated by most plaintiffs' counsel as evidence that an organization has no accessibility program at all.
Independent of whether you've been sued, the statement serves three working purposes. Internally, it forces your team to commit to a conformance target you can audit against. In discovery, it documents a remediation program that courts look favorably on versus defendants who produce nothing. And on the day a real user notices a broken flow, it gives them a feedback channel that is faster, cheaper, and less adversarial than a lawsuit — which is exactly what the DOJ wants you to provide.
What a good accessibility statement includes
The Department of Justice's standard consent-decree accessibility statement covers six sections. Every one of them is a checkmark a plaintiff can use if you omit it:
- Commitment. An opening paragraph naming your organization, the conformance target (WCAG 2.1 AA or 2.2 AA), and your commitment to providing an accessible experience. Sets the tone and creates a contractual-style promise a court can read against your actual site.
- Conformance status. A clear statement of which WCAG level you target and which (if any) criteria you know you do not currently meet. We recommend the DOJ-style "partially conformant" wording when third-party components limit coverage, and "fully conformant" wording only when you've actually audited.
- Feedback. An email address and a turnaround commitment (e.g., "we acknowledge within 2 business days and respond substantively within 5"). Without this, users have no path to report a barrier — and a court treats that as effectively denying the barrier exists.
- Compatibility. The list of assistive technologies and browsers you've tested against. Be specific: NVDA + Firefox, VoiceOver + Safari, JAWS + Chrome. "All modern assistive technologies" is the wrong answer; it tells a court you've done no actual testing.
- Known limitations. The third-party components you don't control and the residual issues you know about. Listing them here moves you from hiding them (which courts punish) to acknowledging them (which courts respect) — and gives your vendor a contractual reference.
- Formal complaint procedure. What a user should do if they file a feedback report and don't get a timely response. This is the section the DOJ almost always requires by name; without it, your "feedback" channel is a black hole.
Legal weight: does having a statement actually help?
The honest answer is no — the statement is not a defense. If your site is inaccessible and someone with standing wants to sue under ADA Title III, the existence of a published statement does not block the suit. What the statement DOES do is buy you three substantial advantages: it documents a remediation program that most courts and DOJ investigators expect to see; it narrows the scope of "obviously known" defects during discovery; and it gives a real user a faster path than litigation, which both reduces lawsuit probability and demonstrates good faith if one is filed anyway. The Department of Justice's standard consent decree leaves the statement in place as a continuing obligation, year after year — it's a published commitment, not a one-time filing.
Examples and references
For a structured walk-through of every clause, see our ADA compliance checklist. For a longer discussion of why this matters even if you've installed an overlay product, see overlays vs. real fixes and our running ADA lawsuits tracker. For industry-specific risk exposure, see dental, restaurants, e-commerce, and healthcare verticals — each carries a different lawsuit volume and a different modal compliance failure pattern.