Meeting the standard before an audit forces it.
Accessibility compliance against EN 301 549 and WCAG 2.1 AA for pharmaceutical websites, brought current before a deadline, an audit finding, or a complaint forces urgent remediation under time pressure.
Most pharma sites we audit fail on the same small set of issues repeatedly: contrast, keyboard operability, untagged PDFs and inaccessible forms. These are known, fixable problems, and addressing them proactively costs far less than remediating under audit pressure.
See the EAA deadline: what pharma must do for the fuller compliance timeline.
A full audit against the specific standard your compliance team has identified, prioritised remediation of what is found, verification against the standard, and documentation your team can use for its own compliance statement.
We work from the scope and conformance requirements your compliance and legal team define for the European Accessibility Act, and build the technical implementation to match — keeping the legal determination where it belongs, with them.
The scope our accessibility compliance work has operated within.
The typical failure differs by what the site carries. Accessibility compliance starts from that content.
What comes up when addressing accessibility proactively.
That is a question for your legal and compliance team. Broadly, the EAA has applied since 28 June 2025 to companies above certain size and turnover thresholds serving EU consumers, with EN 301 549 as the reference standard — whether your specific properties fall in scope is their determination, not ours.
Usually this is the largest accessibility gap and one worth scoping properly rather than assuming the website project automatically covers it. A PDF library of any real size, especially forms and technical documents, typically needs its own remediation workstream with its own timeline, separate from the website rebuild itself.
Often, yes — contrast, focus order, structure and form handling can frequently be corrected in place without a full rebuild. A rebuild becomes the right recommendation only when the platform is built on inaccessible third-party components that simply cannot be reasonably fixed within the existing platform.
No, that formal statement is issued by your compliance team, not by us. What we deliver is the audit findings, the remediation work completed, and evidence of testing against EN 301 549, which gives your team what it needs to make and stand behind the conformance statement itself.
Accessibility compliance often connects to these related problems.
A deadline approaching, an audit finding, or a site nobody has checked. Tell us your standard and we will tell you how we would approach the accessibility compliance work.