(Note: This is a template for the Accessibility Conformity Report. An instance of this report should be issued per application.)


Web application accessibility is tested for conformity to the selected criteria from the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). The review process is based on the W3 Accessibility Evaluation Resources.

The evaluation shows which criteria from the WCAG 2.1, Conformance Level AA the Web application was tested for and how well, on average, the pages meet these criteria. Due to the highly interactive nature of applications, many value added features make 100% compliance impossible without deactivating them. Instead, we include them in the report and all the non-conformities are then identified and checked if they indeed play a critical role in the application or not. Sample Acessibility Report

Even including these secondary features the Web Applications perform at a 90-100% conformance in the majority of categories. Robustness/compaibility is usually the exception due to these kind of features only being supported in modern browsers.

Background and evaluation

Conformance evaluation of web accessibility requires a combination of semi-automated evaluation tools and manual evaluation by an experienced reviewer.

The evaluation results in this report are based on evaluation conducted on the following date(s): 2021-12-03.

The web application may have changed since that time.

Scope of review

A sample Genio generated Web Application was deployed into a IIS server and tested. The following sections and interfaces of the application are a sample that represents all interfaces, controls and functions in this application. Because this application is generated by Genio, using model driven technology, functionality that passes in one interface is guaranteed to pass in all others.

The following application sections were reviewed by semi-automated evaluation tools:

  • Genio Quality Tests > Business operations (20 pages)
  • Genio Quality Tests > Administration (2 pages)
  • Base Tables > Base Tables (2 pages)
  • Profile (1 page)
  • Home (1 page)
  • Account > LogOn (1 page)

The application was tested in the English and Portuguese languages as a sample for multi-language support.


The reviewers areas of expertise, by reference to “expertise of review teams” in Using Combined Expertise to Evaluate Web Accessibility, includes web technologies, validation tools for web technologies, web content accessibility guidelines and techniques and, approaches for evaluating web accessibility.

The language(s) of the reviewers include: English, Portuguese.

Review Process

  • Evaluation and validation tools used, and versions thereof:
    • Pa11y (6.1.1)
    • Firefox Accessibility Inspector (94.0)
  • Description of manual reviews (usability testing of accessibility features) used:
    • Verify that the purpose of controls and links are understandable (1.3.5)
    • Verify that all headings and labels make sense (2.4.6)
    • Confirm error prevention is supported and error messages are available in text (3.3.4)

Results for criteria tested

1 Perceivable 7
1.1 Text alternatives 2
1.1.1 Non-text content has alternative texts 2
1.3 Adaptable 7
1.3.1 Information, structure and relationships are identifiable 7
1.3.5 Purpose of form fields for user data is identifiable 0
1.4 Distinguishable 0
1.4.3 Contrast between text and background is sufficient (minimum contrast) 0
2 Operable 1
2.4 Navigable 1
2.4.2 Titles describe subject or purpose 1
2.4.6 Headlines and labels describe topic or purpose 0
2.5 Entry modalities 0
2.5.3 Label contains visible inscription 0
3 Understandable 0
3.1 Readable 0
3.1.1 Language can be programmatically determined 0
3.2 Predictable 0
3.2.2 Input does not lead to context change 0
3.2.3 Navigation is consistently structured 0
3.3 Input assistance 0
3.3.1 Error messages are available in text form 0
3.3.4 Error prevention is supported (legal, financial, data) 0
4 Robust 14
4.1 Compatible 14
4.1.1 Valid Syntax is used 12
4.1.2 Name, role and value are identifiable 7