The short version

This site aims to meet WCAG 2.2 Level AA. Every page is tested automatically, and at the date above there are no unresolved automated accessibility failures across all 17 pages.

That is not the same as saying the site works for everyone, and we would rather say so than imply otherwise. Automated testing finds roughly a third to a half of real accessibility barriers. The rest need a person. We have not yet done that testing, and it is the next thing on our list — see what we have not tested.

Our commitment

P3MAI sells delivery assurance. It would be a poor advertisement to hold client websites to a standard this one did not meet, so this site is tested with the same regime and reported on in the same format as the sites we build for clients.

We treat an accessibility problem as a fault, not a preference. If something here does not work for you, that is a bug in our site and we would like to fix it.

Conformance status

Partially conformant with WCAG 2.2 Level AA. "Partially conformant" means most of the standard is met, but we have not verified every success criterion — specifically the ones that can only be judged by a person using the site, not by a tool. We are not claiming full conformance, because we cannot yet evidence it.

There has been no independent third-party audit. The testing described below is our own.

How we tested

Last tested 13 August 2026, against the live site.

  • Automated audit — every page checked with axe-core against the WCAG 2.2 A and AA rulesets.
  • Mobile and responsive layout — every page at 360px, 390px and 768px in two different browser engines, checking that no page forces you to scroll sideways to read it.
  • Keyboard focus and form labelling — checked automatically; every form control has a programmatic label.
  • Zoom and reflow — the layout is fluid from 360px upwards, so text reflows rather than clipping when you zoom.

The full record, including the figures behind each of those, is held in our internal Health Check & Test Assurance report. We are happy to share it on request.

What we fixed

The 13 August testing was the first full audit of this site, and it found real problems. We list them because a statement that claims everything was always fine is not worth reading:

  • Every page could be scrolled sideways on a phone. Three separate causes, all now fixed.
  • 36 accessibility failures, of which three were unlabelled sliders on the cost estimator — the most serious kind, because a screen reader could not say what they controlled. All fixed.
  • Text colours that did not meet the contrast minimum — replaced with a darker tone that passes at any text size.

One known exception, and why

Automated tools flag the gold AI in the P3MAI logo on every page, because it does not meet the contrast minimum. This is a deliberate, permitted exception, not an outstanding fault.

WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.4.3 states that text which is part of a logo or brand name has no contrast requirement. The gold is used only in the wordmark. Ordinary text on this site never uses it — body text uses a darker gold that meets the contrast minimum at any size.

We mention it because anyone running an automated checker over this site will see those flags, and we would rather explain them here than have you wonder.

What we have not tested

This is the part most accessibility statements leave out.

  • No screen-reader testing. Nobody has yet been through this site with NVDA, JAWS or VoiceOver. Automated tools cannot substitute for this and we are not pretending otherwise.
  • No manual keyboard-only walkthrough. Focus order and visible focus have been checked automatically, not by a person navigating the whole site with the keyboard alone.
  • Firefox is not in our browser testing. Two engines are covered; Firefox's is not one of them.
  • Content and language have not been assessed. Whether our writing is clear enough is an accessibility question too, and no tool measures it.
  • Content shown only after interaction — for example the quote panel on the cost estimator — is not covered by the automated audit, which cannot see hidden content.

Each of these is a real gap. We would rather name them than let a green result imply a coverage we do not have.

Known limitations

  • The map on the Contact page is embedded from Google Maps. Its accessibility is Google's, not ours, and we cannot fix it. The same address and phone number are always given as plain text next to it, so you never need the map to reach us.
  • The cost estimator is the most interactive page here. It has been fixed where testing found problems, but it is the page we would most like feedback on.

Technical information

This site relies on HTML, CSS and JavaScript. JavaScript is an enhancement, not a requirement — every page, every link and the whole navigation work without it. The one exception is the cost estimator, which needs JavaScript to calculate; if you cannot use it, ask us for a quote directly and we will price it for you by hand.

This site sets no cookies and runs no analytics or tracking, so there is no consent banner to navigate past.

Tell us if something does not work

If any part of this site is difficult or impossible for you to use, please tell us. You do not need to know why it is failing or use any particular terminology — "the text on the services page is too small to read" is a perfectly good bug report.

We aim to reply within two business days. If we cannot fix something quickly we will tell you what we are doing about it and give you the information another way in the meantime.

Review

This statement was prepared on 13 August 2026 following testing carried out on the same date. We review it whenever the site changes materially, and at least annually. A statement that has drifted away from the site it describes is worse than none, because it is a claim rather than a record.