Every issue an auditor identifies should map to a specific WCAG success criterion. If it does not, the report is incomplete and the path to conformance becomes guesswork. The way to confirm this is to ask for a sample audit report before signing, then check that each row of findings lists the exact criterion number, the level, and the version of WCAG used. A qualified auditor will provide this readily. A questionable one will hedge.
This is one of the clearest signals of audit quality. It separates serious accessibility work from surface-level review.
| What to Verify | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| Sample report request | Reveals how the auditor structures findings and whether each issue ties to a criterion. |
| Criterion number listed per issue | Confirms the auditor is referencing WCAG directly, not generalizing. |
| WCAG version and level specified | Distinguishes 2.1 AA from 2.2 AA work and confirms the scope of evaluation. |
| Manual evaluation methodology | Scans flag approximately 25% of issues. Criterion-level mapping requires human review. |
Why Criterion Mapping Is the Standard
WCAG is a structured set of success criteria. Each one has a number, a level (A, AA, AAA), and a defined requirement. When an auditor evaluates a digital asset, every issue identified should reference the criterion it violates. Without that reference, the development team has no clear path to remediation and the organization cannot make a defensible conformance claim.
A finding like “button is hard to read” is not actionable. A finding like “button does not meet WCAG 2.1 Success Criterion 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) at Level AA” is. The second version tells the team exactly what to fix and against what standard.
What Does a Properly Mapped Audit Report Look Like?
A properly structured audit report lists each issue with the following at minimum: the WCAG version, the success criterion number and name, the conformance level, a description of the issue, the location where it appears, and the recommended fix.
The criterion mapping is the spine of the report. Without it, severity ratings and remediation guidance have nothing to anchor to. Every other column in the spreadsheet depends on that single reference point being correct.
How to Ask the Right Questions Before Hiring
Request a redacted sample report from any auditor you are considering. Look at three things: every issue has a criterion number, the version of WCAG is stated clearly, and the conformance level is identified. If the sample shows general categories instead of specific criterion references, the audit will produce the same gap in your report.
Ask how the auditor addresses edge cases. Some issues touch multiple criteria. A capable auditor will list the primary criterion and note related ones. A weaker provider will pick one at random or leave the field blank.
Scans Cannot Replace Criterion-Level Mapping
Automated checkers flag approximately 25% of issues and frequently produce findings that do not map cleanly to a specific criterion. Scan output often groups issues by category (color, alt text, headings) rather than by the precise success criterion involved.
A manual audit is the only way to determine WCAG conformance because only a human evaluator can apply the criterion language to the specific context of a page or screen. Criterion mapping is judgment work.
Red Flags in Auditor Sample Reports
Watch for vague language. Findings labeled “accessibility issue” or “usability concern” without a criterion reference signal that the auditor is not working from WCAG directly. Watch for inconsistent version references. If some findings cite 2.1 and others cite 2.0, ask why. Watch for missing levels. A criterion at AAA is not the same as one at AA, and the report should make that distinction every time.
If the sample report does not pass these checks, the deliverable you receive will have the same problems.
FAQ
How can I tell if an auditor is qualified to map WCAG criteria correctly?
Ask for a redacted sample report and review whether every issue references a specific success criterion number, the WCAG version, and the conformance level. Qualified auditors typically hold credentials like DHS Trusted Tester or CPACC and can explain why a finding maps to one criterion versus another.
What WCAG version should the auditor be using?
WCAG 2.1 AA remains the most widely referenced standard in U.S. accessibility work, and WCAG 2.2 AA is increasingly requested. The auditor should confirm which version applies to your project before work begins and use that version consistently throughout the report.
Should every single issue map to one criterion or can it map to several?
Most issues map to a primary criterion, but some legitimately touch more than one. A skilled auditor identifies the primary criterion and notes related ones where applicable. What matters is that the report never lists an issue without at least one criterion reference.
Confirming criterion mapping before you hire is the difference between an audit you can act on and a report that sits unused.
Contact qualified accessibility auditors in the directory to compare sample reports.