Twelve real websites that take WCAG 2.2 AA seriously — government, healthcare, education, and accessibility-focused organizations. URCO's read on what each does well, the caveats worth knowing, and the specific patterns worth examining when you build your own.
The United Kingdom’s central government website. Widely treated as the reference example for content-driven accessibility. Plain language by design. Accessible navigation. Forms that don’t rely on JavaScript. Their GOV.UK Design System is a public reference for accessible component patterns.
Worth examining Their form patterns — error summary at the top of the page, errors per field, autocomplete hints, keyboard-friendly date and address inputs.
The official US government information portal. Bound by Section 508, audited regularly. Skip-to-main link, language toggle, semantic landmarks, predictable navigation. Useful as a reference for information-architecture-heavy sites — when there’s a lot to navigate, how do you keep it accessible?
Worth examining The way the search results page handles “no results” — clear empty state, suggestions with proper landmarks, a path forward.
The official US government design system, used by hundreds of federal websites. Open-source, documented per-component, and explicitly tested against Section 508 and WCAG 2.1 AA (with 2.2 criteria being adopted). The component documentation includes accessibility notes per pattern, which is rare and useful.
Worth examining Their accordion, modal, and form components — public, documented, tested. Better starting points than building from scratch.
A community-driven accessibility resource. Their site practices what their content preaches. Excellent typography, strong color contrast, well-structured headings, accessible code samples. Useful as a reference for content-heavy sites where readability matters as much as conformance.
Worth examining Their accessibility checklist page — a different format than URCO’s own, but useful as a cross-reference.
A non-profit accessibility center at Utah State University. Authors of the WAVE accessibility evaluation tool. Their own site is conservative by design — limited motion, high contrast, every interaction keyboard-friendly. Their annual WebAIM Million report is the canonical industry data on accessibility failures across the top one million homepages.
Worth examining Their contrast checker tool — keyboard-accessible, screen-reader-friendly, clean live-region updates.
Apple’s own accessibility hub. Heavy use of motion and video, all of which include captions and reduced-motion alternatives. Skip-link first focus, semantic structure throughout, clear keyboard paths. Strong example of how a marketing-heavy site can hit conformance without watering down the visuals.
Caveat Apple’s broader product pages (apple.com/iphone, apple.com/mac) are heavier on animation and harder to verify end-to-end. The accessibility hub itself is the example here.
Microsoft’s public-facing accessibility commitment site. Strong focus order, descriptive link text, accessible video carousel, captioned media. Notable for clear language describing what Microsoft’s accessibility programs actually deliver — concrete, not vague.
Worth examining How they handle their video carousel — a pattern that fails accessibility audits constantly. Their implementation pauses on focus, exposes controls to screen readers, and respectsprefers-reduced-motion.
Google’s web platform documentation site, with a sizable accessibility section of its own. Logical heading hierarchy, accessible code samples (focusable, copy-button announces success via live region), and a strong example of dark/light mode that respects user preference and stores it accessibly.
Worth examining Their Learn Accessibility course is itself a strong reference for conformance, both in the curriculum and in the implementation.
MIT’s institutional accessibility hub. Useful as a reference for any school or non-profit that needs to publish its compliance posture publicly. Clear conformance statement, contact path, request-for-accommodation flow, and links to MIT’s accessibility services.
Worth examining The structure of their accessibility statement — every section URCO recommends in our statement template is present.
Free educational platform. Captioned video at scale, accessible math notation (a notoriously hard problem), keyboard-accessible interactive exercises. Strong example of a content-heavy product where accessibility is built into the underlying engine, not bolted on per-page.
Caveat Some interactive exercises rely on patterns that work better with sighted-mouse use; the platform publishes a list of known limitations on their accessibility page, which is itself a good sign of an honest program.
The BBC has long-published accessibility guidelines and an internal accessibility programme. Their public site is one of the most-tested broadcast sites in the world. Skip links, semantic structure, captioned video, accessible audio player. The accessibility commitment is bound up in their public-service charter.
Worth examining Their accessible video and audio player — a pattern most news and broadcast sites get badly wrong.
The UK’s National Health Service. Bound by UK public-sector accessibility regulations and audited regularly. Notable for how it handles complex healthcare information accessibly — symptom checkers, condition descriptions, find-a-service tools — without dumbing the content down.
Worth examining The NHS design system — open source, documented per-component, with explicit accessibility guidance like GOV.UK.
Every site here that holds up to scrutiny has the same three things in common, regardless of sector: an accessibility statement that names a real conformance target, a public contact path for accessibility issues, and observable investment in the underlying design system or component library. Sites that fail accessibility audits almost always lack at least two of those three.
If you’re running a website, the URCO position is: those three are the minimum, and they should be in place before you write a single new feature. The URCO accessibility audit ships all three as deliverables — a per-criterion conformance report, a publishable statement, and remediation roadmap that translates into specific design-system updates.
List last reviewed 2026-04-30. URCO does not certify any third-party site as ADA or WCAG conformant — see the “How to read this list” note at the top of the page.
You can't fully — there is no government-issued certification. What you can do is run automated WCAG 2.2 AA testing (axe-core, WAVE, Lighthouse), do manual screen-reader and keyboard testing, and check whether the site publishes a current accessibility statement listing its conformance posture and contact path. The 12 sites below are URCO's assessment based on those public signals — not an authoritative compliance claim.
Two reasons. First, government and federally-funded organizations are bound by Section 508 (federal agencies), ADA Title II (state and local government), and Section 504 (federal-funded organizations including schools and healthcare) — they have legal pressure to invest in accessibility that most private companies don't. Second, government sites often publish their conformance reports publicly, which makes assessment easier. The private-sector examples in this list are companies that have made accessibility a public commitment.
A few — Apple's accessibility hub, Microsoft's accessibility site. Pure e-commerce examples are harder to verify because shopping flows have so many edge cases (cart, checkout, payment, third-party widgets) that even well-built sites fail in places. The honest list of e-commerce sites with provable WCAG 2.2 AA conformance across the full purchase flow is small. URCO does not include sites we cannot independently confirm.
Use them as references for specific patterns — keyboard navigation, form design, focus indicators, accessibility statement language. Don't clone the layouts; the design language of each site is shaped by its own audience and brand. The accessibility patterns are what's reusable.
Quarterly. Sites change. A site that's a strong example today can ship a regression next week. URCO re-tests this list quarterly and removes any site that has materially regressed. The "last reviewed" date at the bottom of the page reflects the most recent re-test pass.
Build a website that is accessible, search-ready, conversion-aware, and built to perform.