Accessibility statement: when required, what goes in it?

An accessibility statement is public status documentation: how accessible your website or app is, what still fails, and how you plan to improve it. According to Digitoegankelijk, your organisation accounts to supervisors and to visitors. The statement does not replace real accessibility; it describes the current state, including known gaps and a plan.

In practice a serious statement also needs evidence. For government that often means links to audit reports, a contact path for reports, and a plan for open issues. Without that context a statement is little more than an empty promise. With it, it becomes a working document you update after releases and re-audits.

The technical yardstick behind most requirements is WCAG level AA. The statement itself is not a quality-mark scorecard; it is a legal or regulatory compliance document. For the broader duty (government versus business), start with digital accessibility.

For government organisations the statement is legally required. Digitoegankelijk puts it bluntly: without a statement you do not meet the law, and you must create statements for all your websites and apps to a fixed model. Who is obliged? lists central government, provinces, municipalities, water boards and public-law bodies among others.

According to Digitoegankelijk, websites also include intranets, extranets and cloud applications; apps include native, web and hybrid apps. Every government website or app gets a status from A to E. Status A, B or C meets the law; status E means there is still no statement. Status A or B requires a full accessibility audit as evidence.

After you publish, Digitoegankelijk reviews the statement and suggests improvements. According to Digitoegankelijk every statement must be updated at least once a year, and an audit is valid for 3 years. A statement that sits unchanged drops in status. Publishing is step one; keeping it current is the real work.

Since 28 June 2025 the European Accessibility Act (EAA) applies to e-commerce services among others. According to ACM guidance, the accessibility duty covers providers with 10 or more employees or annual turnover above 2 million euros. Micro-enterprises below both thresholds are exempt.

Services in scope also have a statement duty: you explain how your service meets the accessibility rules, in a place that is easy to find. Think footer, help centre or account menu. The ACM line we use on this site matches our EAA page: be accessible and document it; a quality mark is not legally required.

The government model and Digitoegankelijk dashboard are not the standard route for a web shop. The underlying idea is the same: be honest about what works, what still fails, and how visitors can give feedback. A checkout that only works with a mouse belongs in that documentation until you fix it.

What goes in the EAA statement of a web shop? The ACM does not prescribe a fixed model as for government, but it does say what the statement must do. Use this checklist:

Want to back up your statement? Use the scan as evidence for your statement, then walk through the buying process with our EAA checklist for web shops. WebYes also publishes its own statement.

The statement is public and aimed at your visitors. The duty to report is a notification to the ACM: if you cannot fix an accessibility problem right away, you report it within 1 week (critical or serious) or 1 month (moderate or minor), with a plan of action. An honest statement does not replace that report. More on deadlines and exceptions on our page on the European Accessibility Act.

Government bodies create the statement via the assistant at toegankelijkheidsverklaring.nl. Digitoegankelijk describes that wizard as the way to produce statements that meet the mandatory model. You need an account at toegankelijkheidsverklaring.nl.

Before you start, according to Digitoegankelijk, you gather among other things: web addresses or app-store links, links to audit reports, which success criteria still have problems, a date by which the problems are fixed at the latest with the measures and alternatives until then, links to contact and complaints procedure, and the name and role of the director or manager who signs. Without those pieces you stall in a draft.

After publication the statement enters the register. Digitoegankelijk notes that the accessibility label (or the full HTML statement) must go on the site; a bare link alone is not enough for government. Companies under the EAA usually do not use this government portal as their legal channel, but can still use the structure as a checklist: scope, evidence, feedback path, plan.

WebYes is an independent website review on four pillars: accessibility, speed, security and mobile. GEKEURD means that at audit time your site met our thresholds: average at least 80, and at least 60 per pillar. That is not a Digitoegankelijk status A to E, and not an ACM statement under the EAA.

Our scan runs automated checks against WCAG 2.2 AA and covers up to six pages per run. That helps find quick, measurable problems: missing alt texts, low contrast, empty buttons, missing form labels. Automated checks do not catch everything; government status A or B still needs a full audit, and EAA certainty on checkout often needs manual testing.

Use WebYes as a starting point for remediation, not as a substitute for the legal statement. Measure where you stand first, fix the blockers, then publish an honest statement through the right channel (government: Digitoegankelijk model; e-commerce: a findable status page along ACM guidance).

Check that the scope is right: which URLs and apps fall under this statement, and which do not. Note the research date and whether it was an automated sample (WebYes: free up to six pages, full audit up to fifteen) or a full manual investigation. Without that nuance the text reads as if everything is AA while only lab checks were done.

Put open fails with owner and deadline in the remediation plan. Wire feedback channels (contact, complaint) that are actually staffed. Only then sign: a statement without a fix path is paper, not compliance. Repeat after releases and after re-audit so status A/B or EAA claims do not go stale.