Untracked remediation actions
Accessibility fixes ship as ad-hoc tickets across designers, developers, and content owners — with no central record of what was changed, when, or by whom.
Build an accessibility remediation record your firm can stand behind.
Accessibility risk doesn't show up in your CRM. It shows up as a complaint letter. We help managing partners, legal ops, and marketing ops build a repeatable remediation cadence — with named owners, traceable changes, and a monthly report you can hand to the bench.
The pattern we see most often: the first letter arrives, the firm scrambles, three associates spend two weeks assembling evidence that should have been a query — and the underlying remediation gap is still there a month later.
Who this is for
Managing partners, legal ops leaders, and marketing ops owners at firms that need a repeatable, auditable workflow for ADA website accessibility remediation — built around clear ownership and a monthly cadence that supports defensibility.
- Prioritize website accessibility fixes that reduce exposure.
- Create repeatable intake and remediation workflows across practice teams.
- Support defensibility with centralized, traceable records and named owners.
Common workflow failures in legal accessibility programs
Pattern recognition from advisory conversations — not guarantees, not legal advice.
Unclear page-level accountability
Nobody owns specific URLs. When a complaint letter lands, the firm scrambles to assemble evidence that should have been a query, not an investigation.
No defensibility cadence
Remediation gets done in bursts, then drifts. A repeatable monthly cadence with named owners is what stands behind the work — not a one-time audit.
Implementation approach
A three-step engagement that gives your associate a Monday-morning task and your firm a monthly cadence.
Step 1: Site and workflow inventory
A scoped review of your site surface area, content ownership, and existing remediation activity. The artifact is a structured inventory — not a discovery deck for the partner meeting.
Step 2: Remediation prioritization with ownership map
Each page-level remediation item is ranked, scoped, and assigned to a named owner. Designers, developers, and content owners all see the same record.
Step 3: Monthly defensibility report cadence
A repeatable monthly report — what changed, who shipped it, what is still open. It supports your defensibility posture without ad-hoc evidence assembly when the letter arrives.
The diagnostic we run in the first 20 minutes
Five questions we ask in the opening minutes of a workflow review for firm accessibility programs. If you can answer all five cleanly, your defensibility posture is probably solid. Pattern recognition from advisory conversations — not legal advice.
Name your three highest-traffic URLs that haven't been accessibility-reviewed in the last six months.
If you can't name them quickly, the inventory step is overdue.
Who owns remediation for each — by name, not by department?
"Marketing owns the site" isn't an owner. A person is.
When was your firm's last formal accessibility audit — and where does the record live?
"In someone's inbox" is the answer that creates the next problem.
If a complaint letter arrives Monday, who assembles the response and from what record?
Defensibility is built before the letter arrives, not after.
What is your cadence for verifying that a remediation actually shipped?
A monthly artifact beats a quarterly scramble.
We run this in the Workflow Review — no preparation required. Book the 20-minute session →
Latest articles
Law Firm Website ADA Compliance: The Fixes That Actually Matter
Law firms face increasing ADA website accessibility lawsuits. Here are the specific fixes that eliminate the most common violations and protect your practice.
9 min read
Ready to make Monday morning easier?
Bring one workflow — intake, remediation, or reporting — to a 20-minute working session. You leave with a prioritized punch list and an ownership map. No slides, no pitch.
Guidance, not legal advice. Engage qualified counsel for jurisdiction- and matter-specific questions about ADA accessibility risk and remediation.