Skip to main content
← All resourcesResearch

How accessible are Florida’s county websites? Our 2026 scan

We tested the home page of every Florida county government website on October 14, 2026. Of the 64 we could reach, 50 (78%) had at least one WCAG 2.1 AA failure that automated testing can detect, most often low-contrast text and links with no accessible name. Nearly half load an accessibility overlay, and those sites were no more likely to pass.

By Awesome Cause · About our founder · · Updated · 6 min read

What we found

64 county home pages
78%
had at least one detectable WCAG 2.1 AA failure
39%
had text with too little contrast
48%
load an accessibility overlay widget
23%
don’t link to an accessibility page

Florida has 67 counties. We found the official county government website for each one and ran the same automated accessibility test on its home page. Three sites turned our test browser away, so the results cover 64.

Fifty of the 64 home pages failed at least one WCAG 2.1 Level AA success criterion that software can check. That is the standard the Justice Department’s ADA Title II rule requires. The typical failing page had two kinds of problems, and some had six. Fourteen pages had no failures our test could detect, which is a good start but not a pass (more on that below).

For comparison, WebAIM’s February 2026 study of the top million home pages found detectable WCAG failures on 95.9% of them. It uses a different tool, so the numbers are not directly comparable, but Florida’s county home pages are doing better than the web as a whole.

The problems that showed up most

Most of what we found comes from a handful of patterns. Each one usually lives in a site template, so one fix repairs it on every page that uses it.

Failures found on the most county home pages (64 scanned)
What failedWCAG 2.1 criterionCounties
Text with too little contrast against its background1.4.325 (39%)
Links with no name a screen reader can announce, usually icon or image links2.4.4, 4.1.223 (36%)
ARIA attributes that are not allowed or not valid where they are used4.1.215 (23%)
Buttons with no name a screen reader can announce4.1.210 (16%)
Lists built with the wrong markup, so their structure is lost1.3.110 (16%)
Images with no text alternative1.1.19 (14%)
Embedded frames (maps, video, widgets) with no title4.1.25 (8%)
Hidden content that keyboard focus can still land on4.1.25 (8%)

Contrast was the most common failure, as it is across the web: light gray text, white text on a pale photo, or a colored link on a colored band. WCAG asks for a contrast ratio of at least 4.5 to 1 for normal text.

Unnamed links and buttons came next. They are usually social media icons, search buttons, slideshow arrows and logos with no text a screen reader can say. A blind resident hears “link” or “button” and has to guess.

The ARIA problems are code that tells assistive technology something untrue about a control, often from a menu, slider or widget a vendor supplied.

Overlays didn’t close the gap

An overlay is a widget, usually a floating accessibility icon, that promises to make a site accessible from one line of code. Thirty-one of the 64 home pages load one.

Twenty-seven of those 31 sites still had detectable WCAG failures, compared with 23 of the 33 sites without an overlay. An overlay sits on top of the page. It doesn’t repair the site’s own code, and that code is what WCAG measures and what screen readers rely on. In 2025 the Federal Trade Commission ordered one of the best-known overlay vendors to pay $1 million for claiming its product made sites compliant. Our article on overlays has the details.

Fifteen home pages don’t point to an accessibility statement

On 15 of the 64 home pages, no link mentions accessibility. A statement isn’t one of the WCAG success criteria, but it is where a resident who hits a barrier finds out how to report it and get help another way. W3C’s guide to writing an accessibility statement lists what to include, starting with contact details for feedback. It is also the cheapest item on this list to fix.

Why a clean scan isn’t a pass

Automated tests find only some barriers. When GOV.UK tested accessibility tools against a page with 143 known barriers, the best single tool found about 4 in 10. A scanner can’t tell whether alt text describes the image, whether the keyboard order makes sense, whether captions are accurate, or whether a form can be completed without a mouse. W3C says plainly that tools can’t determine accessibility on their own.

A home page is also a small part of a county website. The services residents rely on, such as permits, payments, agendas, meeting video and PDF forms, are often on other pages or run by vendors, and the rule covers those too.

What to do before your deadline

Counties with 50,000 or more people must meet WCAG 2.1 AA by April 26, 2027. Smaller counties have until April 26, 2028. The ADA Title II page explains what the rule covers.

  1. Fix the template-level failures first. Contrast, unnamed links and buttons, and image alternatives in the header, footer and home page affect every visit.
  2. Test the services, not just the pages. Walk through paying a bill, finding an agenda and applying for a permit using only a keyboard, then with a screen reader.
  3. Ask your vendors for evidence. Request a current conformance report for each third-party tool on your site.
  4. Don’t count on an overlay. Put that budget toward fixing the code.
  5. Publish an accessibility statement with a contact for reporting barriers, and link it from every page.

Our free ADA Title II readiness checklist covers the rest, item by item.

How we did it

  • Which sites: the official website of each county’s board of county commissioners, or the consolidated government for Duval County (City of Jacksonville). We started from Wikidata and confirmed each address against the county’s own site, its clerk’s site or the Florida Association of Counties directory.
  • Which page: the home page only, as it loaded on October 14, 2026, in a desktop browser window 1,280 pixels wide. Overlays, pop-ups and banners were left as a visitor would see them.
  • The test: axe-core 4.13, an open-source accessibility engine, set to the WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 Level A and AA rules. We counted a county as failing a check if axe-core reported at least one violation for it. We counted an overlay if the page loaded the script of a widely sold overlay product, and an accessibility link if a link’s text, label or address mentioned accessibility or Section 508.
  • Not tested: Baker, Calhoun and Hardee counties, whose sites blocked our automated browser. We did not try to get around those blocks.
  • Limits: results change as sites change, so a page may look different today. These are automated results for one page, not an audit.

Results by county

We tested these 64 counties. Each name links to what we found on that county’s home page: the checks it failed, the overlay it loads, if any, and whether it links to an accessibility page.

Not tested: Baker, Calhoun and Hardee counties, whose sites blocked our automated browser.

See every county’s results

Let's talk about your project!

Send a short note about what needs to change. We’ll reply personally, talk through scope and budget, and arrange a conversation if it would help.

Tell us about your project

Prefer email? hello@awesomecause.com

Tell us about your project

Start with a short note.

Tell us a little about the project. We’ll reply personally within one business day and arrange a time to talk if it would help.

What do you need?
Two or three sentences is plenty.

Prefer email? hello@awesomecause.com. No newsletters, no spam, ever.