Keeping Evidence of Accessibility Remediation
When an accessibility complaint arrives, the most valuable asset is a dated record of what was found, fixed, and verified. How to keep remediation evidence that holds up.
Teams fix accessibility issues constantly and record almost none of it. Fixes live in deploy notes, ticket comments, and chat threads. Months later, when a complaint or demand letter asks what was done and when, the honest answer is scattered across five systems and three former employees.
Remediation evidence is a habit, not a project. This guide sets out what to record for each fix, where to keep it, and how the record changes conversations with counsel, vendors, and complainants.
Record the fix, the date, and the verification
For each remediation, keep five facts: the barrier, the pages or components affected, the date found, the date fixed, and how the fix was verified, including the assistive technology or method used. Five lines per fix is enough. A record with those facts answers most questions it will ever face.
Screenshots and scan exports support the record but do not replace it. A scan showing zero errors does not say when the barrier was fixed or whether a person verified it, and those are the questions that matter.
Keep one register, owned by one role
Evidence scattered across tools is evidence lost. Keep a single remediation register, a simple document or tracker, with one owning role responsible for entries being made when fixes ship, not reconstructed later.
Reconstruction is where records fail. Entries written at ship time are dated by the work itself. Entries written during a complaint are dated by memory, and the difference is visible to anyone who reads them closely.
Include the unresolved items honestly
A credible register lists open items with their status and planned route, not only victories. A record showing only completed fixes looks curated. One showing findings, priorities, and in progress work looks like a functioning program, because it is one.
Open items should carry owners and next steps rather than dates nobody believes. A realistic plan for a hard item is stronger evidence of good faith than a fantasy deadline that slips three times.
Connect vendor findings to the same record
Barriers inside third party components belong in the register too, marked as vendor owned, with the date the vendor was notified and their response. That chain shows the store acted on what it found, which is the stores responsibility even when the code is not.
Review the register quarterly with whoever owns accessibility. The review keeps entries flowing, spots journeys with repeat findings, and produces the summary counsel will ask for, before counsel has to ask during a live matter.
Related reading
If this topic is useful, these earlier guides go deeper on connected questions: Documenting Accessibility Fixes for Legal and Insurance Reviews, ADA Risk in Quick View and Quick Buy Modals, and ADA Risk in Size and Fit Tools Most Audits Skip.
Frequently asked questions
What should a remediation record contain?
The barrier, where it occurred, when it was found, when it was fixed, and how the fix was verified. Those five facts, recorded at the time, answer nearly every later question.
Are clean scan results enough evidence?
No. A scan shows a moment and a method with known blind spots. It supports a record but cannot show when work happened or whether anyone verified the fix with assistive technology.
Should unresolved issues be recorded too?
Yes. A register that includes open items with owners and plans is more credible than one listing only successes, and it doubles as the working plan for the accessibility program.
How long should remediation evidence be kept?
Keep it for the life of the site version it describes and well beyond, following counsels guidance for your situation. Storage is cheap. Reconstructing a deleted record during a complaint is not.