These are starting points and fixed packages, not teaser prices. Scope changes the total; the rate card tells you whether the conversation is worth having.
Every quote confirms the tested surfaces, environments, exclusions, deliverables, and timeline in writing.
per core template or screen · 8-template minimum
Manual WCAG evaluation with assistive technology, evidence, severity, code-level guidance, and a phased roadmap.
See detailsfixed fee · 10 business days
Website assessment, gap report, remediation roadmap, and operational support for the 2026 compliance report.
See detailsscoped audit included
VPAT 2.5 WCAG edition, completed ACR, and the engineering evidence report behind it.
See detailsper hour · 2-hour minimum
Developer pairing, component fixes, PR review, focus and ARIA support, and verification testing.
See detailsper standard page · complex pages from $10
Tagging, reading order, headings, tables, forms, alternative text, and validation.
See detailshalf-day · full-day $1,600
Role-based sessions for developers, designers, content authors, or procurement teams.
See detailsUse these numbers for planning. Final scope depends on product complexity, template count, mobile coverage, and procurement requirements.
| Package | Price | What changes |
|---|---|---|
| VPAT / ACR: WCAG + Section 508 | $3,400 | Additional federal procurement criteria and reporting |
| VPAT / ACR: International | $4,800 | WCAG, Section 508, and EN 301 549 editions |
| 20-hour remediation block | $2,000 | Effective $100/hour |
| 40-hour remediation block | $3,800 | Effective $95/hour |
| Recorded webinar | $475 | Accessible recording and supporting resource |
Release-gate reviews, quarterly re-tests, ACR updates, and async developer support. Six-month minimum, billed monthly at a lower effective rate than ad hoc or block work.
A large site may have hundreds of URLs generated from 15 shared templates. Testing and reporting the same underlying defect hundreds of times inflates the price and buries the engineering team. Scope is based on representative templates and key journeys.
The useful lever is scope: fewer templates, one platform instead of two, or a later ACR phase. The testing standard and reporting quality do not change.
Yes when you already have a credible, current findings set. Otherwise a reduced audit of the highest-value journeys is usually the fastest way to avoid guessing at the work.
No. No private consultant can make that guarantee. The work documents what was tested, what failed, what changed, and the result of re-testing. Legal interpretation belongs with your counsel.
A 20-minute scope call is usually enough to identify the templates, journeys, platforms, and right package.