The Hidden Accessibility Risk of Third-Party Tools in Website Redesigns

Why Third-Party Accessibility Tools Can Undermine Even the Best Intentions

When municipalities and public-serving organizations invest in a website redesign, accessibility is often front of mind. Leaders ask the right questions. Teams reference standards. Vendors confirm compliance.

And yet, months after launch, accessibility issues still surface.

The reason is rarely the website itself.

More often, the barriers appear inside the third-party accessibility tools connected to it.

Accessibility Is No Longer Just a Website Issue

Modern websites are not simply collections of pages. They are service platforms.

Residents use them to:

Submit service requests
Register for programs
Book facilities
Make payments or donations
Access documents and maps
Ask questions through chat tools

Many of these functions rely on third-party systems. Booking software. Form builders. Payment gateways. Mapping tools. Document viewers.

Even if the website itself is accessible, these tools can quietly reintroduce barriers.

From a resident’s perspective, the distinction does not matter. They experience one service, not a website plus a vendor tool.

From a compliance perspective, the responsibility remains with the organization delivering that service.

Where the Risk Really Comes From

Most accessibility challenges today do not come from visual design or page layout. They come from interaction.

Examples include:

Forms that cannot be completed using a keyboard
Error messages that are not announced by screen readers
Booking systems that require complex visual cues
Embedded maps or documents that cannot be navigated by assistive technology

These issues are often introduced by third-party tools that sit outside the core website.

Vendors may claim accessibility support. Some provide statements or documentation. But those claims are often limited, outdated, or incomplete.

Accessibility can also change over time. A vendor update can unintentionally introduce new barriers without notice.

Why Third-Party Vendor Accessibility Claims Fall Short

A common assumption is that accessibility responsibility shifts to the vendor when a third-party tool is used.

In practice, that protection is limited.

If a resident cannot complete a task on your website, the accountability still sits with your organization. Not the software provider.

This creates a gap between responsibility and control. Organizations are accountable for outcomes but may not have direct authority over how tools evolve.

Without clear oversight, accessibility risks can grow quietly after launch.

Accessibility Compliance Focuses on Services, Not Pages

Accessibility legislation focuses on removing barriers to access. It does not distinguish between content created internally and functionality delivered by vendors.

If a resident cannot submit a form, book a program, or complete a payment, the service itself is inaccessible.

This is why some organizations pass automated audits yet still receive complaints or support calls.

The issue is not whether individual pages meet technical criteria. It is whether people can complete real tasks without assistance.

A Shift in How Leading Organizations Are Responding

Forward-thinking municipalities and nonprofits are changing how they approach accessibility and third-party accessibility tools in three important ways.

First, accessibility is becoming a procurement requirement, not an afterthought. Vendors are expected to demonstrate how accessibility is tested, maintained, and fixed over time.

Second, organizations are testing full user journeys rather than isolated pages. This reveals issues that automated tools often miss.

Third, accessibility is being treated as an ongoing responsibility. Not a one-time project milestone.

This shift reduces risk and improves service quality at the same time.