NeuraScaleNeuraScale

A technical assessment. Not legal or tax advice. Consult counsel on the rule's exceptions and your entity's obligations.

  • This is a readiness scan, not a conformance certificate.
  • It is not legal or tax advice.
  • Automated testing finds only part of what WCAG 2.1 Level AA requires. Manual testing with a keyboard and a screen reader is required for a full evaluation.
  • Exception hints are pattern matches on URLs, hosts and file dates. They are not legal determinations about which content is exempt.
  • Accessibility overlays and widgets are not treated as conformance under this rule.
26 April 2027 and 26 April 2028

Scored today, fixed before the date, with the evidence file your counsel will ask for.

WCAG 2.1 Level AA readiness and remediation for US public entities, at a fixed fee. Evidence per page, not a badge in the corner of your homepage.

The rule

WCAG 2.1 Level AA, and two dates decided by population.

An interim final rule published 20 April 2026 set the compliance dates for web content and mobile apps under ADA Title II. The standard is WCAG 2.1 Level AA.

26 April 2027

Public entities with a total population of 50,000 or more

60 of the 623 Michigan local government .gov domains are in this group.

26 April 2028

Public entities with a total population under 50,000, and special district governments

Most townships, villages and small cities. The larger group by count, by a wide margin.

Source, and the only one cited for the rule: ADA.gov, 2024 web rule resource page, read 6 September 2026. The domain counts come from our own build of the Michigan local government .gov list, from the CISA .gov registry and Census population estimates, 6 September 2026. That registry is a floor on the number of Michigan public entities and not the number: several cities a reader would expect on the list are not on it, because they do not use a .gov domain at all.

Measured, 6 September 2026

Every page of both pilot sites failed.

Two Michigan municipal sites, 40 pages requested on each: a city of about 6,000 and a village of about 3,800. Both are on the 2028 date. Neither is a customer, so neither is named here.

78 of 78

pages scanned failed at least one WCAG 2.1 Level AA rule

35 of 79

PDFs opened had no structure tree, so a screen reader gets no headings

23

of those had no text layer at all, which tagging cannot fix

5 of 6

failing rules on one site were on every page, so they are one fix each

Why the numbers are good news

On the smaller site, five of the six failing rules were on every page scanned. A rule that fails on every page is in the template, so it is one fix, not thirty-eight. On the other site the whole picture was a single theme-level contrast problem repeated 531 times. That is the shape of a municipal accessibility problem, and it is why a fixed fee works here when an hourly audit does not. The backlog that is genuinely large is the documents: 23 of the PDFs we opened had no text layer at all, and no amount of tagging repairs a scan of a piece of paper.

Both scans stopped at 40 pages, so these are partial site scans and every count above is over the pages actually scanned. A full crawl finds more, which is what the readiness report is for. The only exception hint that matched on either site was a year in a document URL, at low confidence. That is a hint that a document is old, not a finding that it is exempt.

Fixed fee

Four prices, no annual seat, no per-page licence.

The large accessibility vendors sell a platform subscription. This is scoped work with a number on it, and the readiness report is credited in full if you go on to remediation.

Starts here
Readiness Report
$750once
credited in full against a remediation tier

Your site scored against WCAG 2.1 Level AA today, with the evidence per page and a plan ordered by what one fix repairs everywhere.

  • Full-domain scan, up to 1,000 pages
  • PDF inventory: which documents have a structure tree, which have no text layer
  • Per-page evidence table with the rule id and the WCAG criterion
  • A remediation plan ordered template-level first
  • An exception review worksheet for you and your counsel
  • A 45 minute walkthrough
Remediation Core
$4,900fixed fee

The template-level fixes, done on your own CMS, then retested against the same scan that found them.

  • Up to 25 templates or components
  • Contrast, focus order, landmarks, labels, alt text workflow, skip links, form errors
  • Content-level fixes on the 50 most visited pages
  • A retest with the same scanner, before and after, in one file
  • A draft accessibility statement and an accessibility page
  • Handover notes for whoever edits the site next
Remediation and Documents
$9,800fixed fee

Core, plus the PDF backlog, which on the sites we have scanned is where most of the unreachable content sits.

  • Everything in Remediation Core
  • Up to 150 documents tagged for reading order and alt text, or converted to HTML
  • Documents with no text layer identified and quoted separately, because tagging cannot fix them
  • A document intake procedure so staff stop adding to the backlog
Monitoring
$190per month
cancel any month

A monthly scan, a delta against last month, and an hour of fixes so small regressions never become a project.

  • Monthly full-domain scan
  • A delta report: what appeared, what was fixed
  • One hour of fixes a month
  • The evidence file kept current and dated
If you are the web vendor, not the entity
White label scan and report for a web vendor's client site
Your brand on the report. Remediation quoted per CMS once we have seen one of your builds.
$350 per site
Who invoices you

A US partner entity invoices US public bodies and pays NeuraScale as a subcontractor. A purchase order written to an Egyptian sole proprietorship stalls in vendor onboarding, so the partner route is the one that gets a project started this budget cycle. Web vendors, agencies and consultants are invoiced directly by NeuraScale, by Wise or bank transfer. There is no card checkout on this offer.

Evidence, not a badge

What you get is a file, dated, per page, with the rule id on every row.

Nobody can certify a website under this rule, and we are not going to pretend otherwise. What survives a question from your counsel or a complaint is a record: what was scanned, when, against which standard, what failed, what was fixed, and the same scan run again afterwards to show the difference. That record is the product. A widget in the corner of the homepage is not, and under this rule an overlay is not treated as conformance at all.

Not in scope

Said out loud, so you do not assume it.

  • Legal advice, including which of your content the rule's exceptions cover
  • Mobile app remediation
  • Accessibility overlays or widgets, which the rule does not treat as conformance
  • RFP responses above the simplified acquisition thresholds
  • Manual audits signed off by a certified tester, which we subcontract and price separately if your procurement requires one

There is no published sample report yet. The two pilot reports carry entity names and URLs, and neither entity agreed to be shown, so linking one would break the promise made in the paragraph above it. A redacted sample is being prepared. Ask on the intake.

If you found this URL in your access log

That was our scanner, and here is exactly what it does.

NeuraScaleAdaScanner is an accessibility crawler. It reads public pages only, honours robots.txt, loads at most four pages at a time with a one second gap, submits no forms and enters no authenticated area. If you would rather it did not visit your site, email omar@neurascale.org and it will be excluded.

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; NeuraScaleAdaScanner/0.1; +https://www.neurascale.org/services/ada-title-ii)
FAQ

The questions a clerk and an IT lead ask.

No. Accessibility overlays and widgets are not treated as conformance under this rule, and that sentence is printed on the first screen of every report we produce. It is also the sentence that separates this offer from the overlay vendors, several of whom have been sued over the claim. If you already pay for an overlay, keep it or drop it as you like, but do not count it as compliance work.
Intake

Ten questions, then your own numbers.

Nothing is charged and nothing is scanned from this form. You get back which date applies to your entity, what a scan of your domain would cover, and a price for the tier that fits. If a readiness report is not what you need, you get told that instead.

The .gov domain if you have one. Plenty of entities are on a .org or .us instead, and that changes nothing about the rule.

This decides which date applies to you: 50,000 or more is 26 April 2027, under 50,000 is 26 April 2028. Special districts are 2028 whatever the number.

If you do not know, pick that. The report tells us anyway.

Minutes, agendas, budgets, forms. An estimate is fine. This is usually the biggest single variable in a quote, and it is the one entities underestimate most.

No credentials and no card details in this form, ever. Government email addresses are public records, and we keep this to one short, relevant message and honour an opt out. A technical assessment, not legal advice.

Prefer email or a call? omar@neurascale.org or +20 150 047 7334. Egypt, remote, GMT+2, so calls land in your morning by arrangement.

The dates

26 April 2027, then 26 April 2028.

Population of 50,000 or more first, everyone else and the special districts a year later. A readiness report is $750 and comes off the price of the remediation. Overlays do not count.

18–24h reply · Cairo + EU hours · honest scoping