Alt-Text Compliance Audit

Use it for intranet pages, knowledge base articles, policy pages, training content, and any other page that contains meaningful images. Include non-decorative images, functional icons, charts, screenshots, and any image with text embedded in it. Decorative images can be reviewed for correct exclusion, but they should not be treated as required alt text items. If a page has no meaningful images, document that the page was reviewed and no in-scope items were found.

Run it whenever new content is published, major pages are updated, or a scheduled accessibility review is due. Many teams also use it as part of a monthly or quarterly content QA cycle for high-traffic intranet and help-center pages. If your organization publishes regulated or employee-facing content frequently, a recurring cadence helps prevent backlogs. Re-audit after remediation to confirm the corrected alt text is actually in place.

A content owner, accessibility reviewer, QA specialist, or trained compliance auditor can complete it. The key is that the reviewer understands the difference between decorative, functional, and complex images and can judge whether the text alternative matches the image’s purpose. For remediation, the audit should assign a clear owner, such as the page author, communications team, or web editor. If your organization has an accessibility program, route findings through that workflow.

Yes. It is designed to support WCAG 2.2 Success Criterion 1.1.1 for non-text content by checking whether meaningful images have appropriate text alternatives. It also helps document cases where a decorative image is correctly excluded or where a complex image needs a longer description. The template is useful for internal compliance tracking, but it does not replace legal review or a formal accessibility assessment. If your organization follows broader accessibility policies, you can add those requirements in the notes section.

The most common issues are missing alt text, alt text that repeats the file name or page heading, and functional images that do not describe the action or destination. Teams also miss decorative images that are not properly marked, which creates noise for screen reader users. Another frequent problem is charts or screenshots that need a longer text equivalent but only have a short label. This template makes those gaps visible and assignable.

Logos and repeated icons should be reviewed for whether they add meaning or simply repeat information already available nearby. If they are decorative or redundant, document that they are excluded from the alt text requirement or handled in a way that avoids unnecessary screen reader noise. If an icon is functional, its alt text should describe the action, such as opening a menu or downloading a file. The goal is to match the image’s role, not force every image into the same treatment.

Yes. You can add department-specific fields for page type, content owner, remediation priority, or approval status. Teams often tailor the audit for HR policies, IT knowledge articles, training modules, or marketing pages because each has different image patterns and review needs. You can also add a severity scale or exception reason list if your workflow requires it. The structure is flexible as long as it still captures the image, the issue, and the corrective action.

Ad hoc reviews usually catch obvious missing alt text but miss patterns, exceptions, and follow-up ownership. This template gives you a repeatable record of what was reviewed, what was excluded, what failed, and who is responsible for fixing it. That makes it easier to track remediation and prove due diligence during an accessibility review. It also reduces the chance that complex images or functional icons are handled inconsistently across pages.