Make accessibility part of keeping the website current.
GroupHarbor is being designed to help staff notice problems, understand the next step, and check a correction. That work starts with the supplied layouts and continues as content changes.
A useful finding should lead to a useful next step.
In development · intended experience
Check what changed
Check the affected page or file after relevant changes, with broader scans when appropriate.
Explain the finding
Show where the issue appears, who may be affected, and whether the next step is a correction or human review.
Identify the responsible party
Distinguish a supplied-platform issue from customer content or an external service.
Recheck the result
Show what was tested and which version was checked. An incomplete scan must not appear as a pass.
An automated scan is not a compliance certificate.
Automated tools can identify some accessibility issues, but they cannot evaluate everything. Human judgment and practical testing remain necessary.
Documents need their own review.
A check of a web page does not establish that a linked PDF is accessible. The available document checks and any specialist remediation work must be described separately.
A target is not a claim of completed conformance.
The proposed design target for supplied layouts and staff workflows is WCAG 2.2 Level AA. Conformance claims will depend on the actual product version, scope, and testing evidence.
Be clear about who handles the work.
The service scope should identify platform maintenance, ordinary publishing guidance, customer-content responsibilities, and separately scoped specialist work. Your institution’s legal obligations are not replaced by a software setting.
Ask about the actual checks and their limits.
A specific question about your pages or documents is more useful than an unexplained score.
Ask an accessibility question