Accessibility monitoring
The patients who can't use your website don't call to tell you.
They hit a form they can't complete, a phone number they can't reach, a booking button their screen reader never announces — and they go somewhere else. You never see it happen, because the site works fine for you.
Sometimes what arrives instead is a letter from a firm that has never been to your practice.
The problem
What a broken page sounds like.
Real findings from real medical practice websites, described the way a patient encounters them. Five of the six elements on this page carry no usable name. The embedded reviews block — the social proof you paid for — is announced as “frame.”
Why you don't already know
Three reasons this stays hidden.
Your site works for you
You built it, you know where everything is, and you navigate with a mouse and good vision. Every test you personally run passes. That is exactly why the problem survives.
The one-off audit expires
A report from eighteen months ago describes a site that no longer exists. A theme update, a new landing page, a plugin, a fresh batch of blog posts — each one can introduce failures nobody re-checked.
Most scans check the wrong pages
An automated tool that takes whatever the sitemap lists first will spend its budget on blog posts and never open the page a patient actually converts on. It returns a good grade, which is worse than returning nothing.
We know, because ours did it too
The first run came back an A. It had never opened the consultation page.
Page discovery drained the blog sitemap first-come and filled seven of eight slots with articles. We fixed it to spread across every child sitemap and prioritize the conversion path, then ran the identical site again — five distinct issue types, including the untitled review widget and the unnamed map link.
A scan that skips the pages a patient converts on is not evidence of anything. If a vendor hands you a clean report, the first question is which pages they opened. There is now a regression test named after that failure so it cannot come back.
The popular answer, and why we refuse it
The overlay widget is one line of JavaScript and a false floor.
Overlays sit on top of the markup rather than repairing it. Disability advocacy organizations campaign against them, plaintiff firms specifically track the sites that run them, and installing one has not reliably stopped litigation — in some cases the presence of an overlay, and the claims made about it, become part of the complaint.
Consential does not install an overlay, and never will. We set out what an overlay can and cannot repair at runtime separately. Our approach is scan, document, remediate: find the real defect, write it down with a date, and tell your team exactly how to fix it in the platform you actually run.
Boundaries, stated up front
What this does not do.
Every vendor in this category overpromises. Here is the list we hold ourselves to, in writing, before you buy anything, alongside the limits we publish and what monitoring costs bundled with consent.
The value here is not a grade. It is a dated, specific record showing what your site's condition was on a given cycle, what changed since the last one, and what was done about it — the difference between we never looked and we look every cycle and act on what we find. Consential is accessibility infrastructure; it is not a law firm, does not provide legal advice, and using it does not by itself satisfy any regulation.
The part most vendors leave to you
We fix it once, by hand, and the report shows the date it changed.
A scan that ends in a list is not a service. When the first cycle comes back, the defects it names can be repaired as a one-time engagement — scoped from your own scan, quoted before any work starts, delivered once, and then it ends. It is not part of the monthly plan and it never turns into a retainer.
Worth being specific about what that covers, because the honest answer is not “everything.” Roughly half the rules we check are mechanically repairable: a missing image description, an unlabelled form field, an iframe with no title, a link whose only content is an icon. Those get fixed directly. Contrast is the other half, and it is usually the larger half — on our own site it was 71 of 71 findings. Contrast is not a patch, it is a decision about your brand colours, so it gets handled as a short design pass with your sign-off rather than changed underneath you.
Priced $750 to $1,500 depending on what the scan actually finds, and scoped in full on the remediation page. After the work, the next cycle's report records what changed and when. It still does not say your site conforms to anything, because that is a determination a court or a regulator makes and no vendor can sell it to you.
No estimate, no lead form ahead of the answer
Find out what your site does to a patient who can't see it.
Run your own domain and get named, specific findings — the element, the page, the rule it breaks, and what it takes to fix.