Digital access is a foundational part of access to public services. For state and local governments, websites, mobile apps, and other online services are often the primary way residents interact with agencies, apply for benefits, receive services, pay bills, access critical information, and participate in society.  The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Title II establishes a clear legal requirement that state and local government services and programs must be accessible to people with disabilities. While Title II has been law for decades, the Department of Justice (DoJ) final ruling of 2024 clarified how these obligations apply to digital services, prompting many public entities to reassess what compliance requires and how to demonstrate usable digital accessibility programs.

Why ADA Title II matters now

Digital services are no longer supplemental to government programs. When these services are inaccessible, residents with disabilities are effectively excluded from participation, even if an agency technically offers the service.  Imagine a blind or low vision resident attempting to pay their taxes via an online portal. If the forms collecting information are not labeled correctly, they may be unable to fill in the form, creating an accessibility barrier. The result is a digital service that is available and usable to sighted residents, but fails to provide equal and effective access under Title II.  For blind and low vision users, access to digital services depends on assistive technologies (AT), such as screen readers and screen magnifiers. These tools translate digital content into speech, Braille, or magnified visual displays, allowing users to independently navigate websites and interact with online services. When digital services are not designed to work reliably with assistive technologies (AT), access breaks down. Under Title II, independence and equal access are not optional outcomes; they are core obligations.

What ADA Title II covers in digital environments

Title II applies to all programs, services, and activities provided or funded by state and local governments, regardless of how those services are delivered, not just buildings or individual web pages. As government entities increasingly move interactions online, this obligation extends fully into digital environments.  That includes:

  • Public-facing websites providing information
  • Mobile apps that deliver services, information, or notifications
  • Digital documents, such as PDF and Word files, application forms, reports, meeting minutes, and public notices
  • Applications supporting transactions, providing portals to services and activities, and other self-service tools

These digital properties are often interconnected, and a single service may rely on multiple systems, document types, and workflows. Under Title II, accessibility is evaluated across the entire digital experience a service or program provides, and is not restricted to a page or document in isolation. As a result, Title II compliance is not assessed at the feature level, but programmatically, based on whether the service as a whole is accessible. If a disabled resident cannot independently complete a required task, such as submitting an application, accessing time-sensitive information, or paying a fee, the service itself may be inaccessible under Title II, even if individual pages or components appear to meet technical guidelines.  This standard is especially relevant for large government ecosystems, where accessibility gaps often occur at transition points between systems, documents, and workflows rather than within a single page.

Programmatic access and effective communication

Title II requires public entities to provide effective communication and equal access to services for people with disabilities. In digital environments, this requires ensuring that content, workflows, and documents work reliably with screen readers and magnification tools and support real-world use by people who are blind or have low vision. The DoJ has consistently emphasized that effective communication is a core Title II obligation, not a best practice.  At a baseline, effective digital communication includes ensuring that:

  • Screen reader users can navigate content and workflows in a logical order
  • Screen magnifier users can zoom, pan, and navigate content without loss of information, functionality, or context
  • Information is available without relying on color perception
  • Interactive elements such as forms can be completed and submitted using the keyboard alone
  • Documents are structured so information is conveyed through identifying headings, lists, and table headers using appropriate document styles
  • Status messages, notifications, error alerts, and confirmations are available to AT users

Under Title II, accessibility is a service-level obligation, meaning users must be able to use digital services as intended, without unnecessary barriers or workarounds. This distinction is why organizations relying solely on automated testing often struggle to demonstrate Title II readiness. Instead, organizations must evaluate digital accessibility in the context of how services are actually used, not just how components are coded.

How WCAG fits into ADA Title II compliance

To provide clarity for digital accessibility expectations, the DoJ’s final rule specifies that covered websites and mobile applications must conform to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA.  Developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), WCAG provides a shared technical framework for identifying common accessibility barriers in digital content. Under Title II, WCAG 2.1 Level AA serves as a baseline for evaluation, but it does not replace the broader obligation to ensure services are accessible in practice. Conformance helps identify technical issues, while AT testing and task validation help determine whether services actually work for users with disabilities.

How ADA Title II compliance is evaluated in practice

ADA Title II does not mandate specific tools or technologies. Instead, compliance is evaluated based on outcomes: whether people with disabilities can effectively access and use digital services.  This is where many organizations run into trouble. Automated accessibility checkers can be helpful for quickly catching many accessibility issues. However, they cannot evaluate context, meaning, or usability. This can result in surface-level conformance, creating experiences that don’t hold up to scrutiny or work in real-world settings.  In practice, effective evaluation includes:

  • Manual accessibility audits led by accessibility experts
  • AT testing with screen readers and screen magnifiers
  • Validation that users with disabilities can independently complete critical tasks from start to finish, using assistive technologies as needed.

Why prioritization matters under ADA Title II

Most government digital ecosystems are large and complex. Websites, subdomains, documents, and third-party systems often span departments and vendors. Additionally, many government entities leverage a mix of cloud, on-premises, and legacy systems, which can easily create accessibility gaps. As a result, accessibility issues can number in the hundreds or thousands.  The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has highlighted the extent of the challenge. In a 2025 review, GAO identified 11 federal legacy IT systems maintained across 10 agencies that remain in critical need of modernization. While these findings are from the federal level, which is subject to separate accessibility regulations, they highlight the risk of outdated systems and fragmented architectures complicate efforts to modernize digital services in a prioritized, risk-based way.  Responding to ADA Title II requirements extends beyond identifying how many issues exist to implementing a strategy for addressing issues in a prioritized manner. Effective prioritization considers:

  • Impact on people with disabilities
  • Criticality of the service or task
  • Frequency of use
  • Effort to fix
  • Legal and operational risk

This approach helps organizations focus limited resources where they matter most, reducing risk while improving access in meaningful ways.

From awareness to action

Understanding ADA Title II is the first step toward readiness. For state and local governments, compliance is not a one-time project. It is an ongoing responsibility tied to how digital services are delivered, maintained, and evolved over time.  Organizations that take a structured, user-centered approach grounded in expert-led audits, usability testing, and strategic prioritization of remediation efforts are better positioned to deliver and maintain accessible services and demonstrate good-faith compliance.  While private companies are not covered by ADA Title II, state and local government entities should assess the risk posed by vendor-supplied digital resources that may not meet Title II accessibility requirements. And, in turn, vendors providing digital tools to state and local government entities should be ready to ensure their tools meet Title II requirements.

Explore digital accessibility services

Digital services have become synonymous with public access, but making them sufficiently accessible to meet ADA Title II compliance can seem overwhelming. An accessibility partner can streamline the compliance process, helping organizations navigate complex regulatory requirements with confidence.  With over 30 years of experience in assistive technology and accessibility implementation, Vispero’s Digital Accessibility Services help public entities assess current-state accessibility, identify high-impact barriers, and prioritize remediation aligned to ADA Title II requirements. Our expert-led approach supports sustainable accessibility across websites, applications, and digital content, helping agencies reduce risk while improving access for constituents and staff.  Learn how Vispero’s Digital Accessibility Services support ADA Title II readiness for public sector organizations.