Accessibility Guidance for Common CMS Platforms

Accessibility outcomes in AEM depend on implementation decisions, component design, governance practices, and content authoring approaches. Accessibility considerations include:

• Component accessibility.
• Template governance.
• Authoring restrictions.
• Workflow validation.

Organizations using AEM should maintain approved accessible component libraries, restrict unsupported customizations, and integrate accessibility reviews into publishing workflows.

Drupal is widely used across federal agencies and can support accessible implementations when appropriately configured, maintained, and governed. Accessibility outcomes depend on implementation, configuration, and content authoring practices.

Drupal accessibility varies significantly depending on:

• Themes.
• Modules.
• Content types and templates.
• Layout Builder and Paragraph components.
• Custom code and integrations.
• Authoring practices.

Common Drupal risks include:

• Custom themes that do not meet accessibility requirements.
• Inaccessible contributed or custom modules.
• Improper heading structure within rich text content.
• Missing or poor-quality alternative text.
• Layout Builder configurations that create reading order issues.
• Inaccessible forms and Webforms.
• Embedded third-party content that is not accessible.
• Reusable components that introduce accessibility defects across multiple pages.
• Uploading inaccessible documents and media.

Drupal authors should:

• Use approved content types, templates, and components.
• Apply headings in a logical hierarchy.
• Add meaningful alternative text to images.
• Use descriptive link text.
• Ensure uploaded documents are accessible.
• Verify multimedia includes captions, audio descriptions, and transcripts when required.
• Follow established content authoring standards.

Drupal site owners and administrators should:

• Use accessible themes and design systems.
• Limit modules to approved and tested solutions.
• Establish governance for reusable components.
• Test custom functionality and integrations.
• Review accessibility after Drupal core and module updates.
• Provide accessibility training for content authors.

Agencies should establish governance for:

• Approved modules and integrations.
• Accessible themes and design systems.
• Reusable content components and paragraph types.
• Content authoring standards.
• Accessibility testing and review processes.
• Ongoing accessibility maintenance and regression testing.

SharePoint is commonly used for intranet and collaboration content.

Common accessibility concerns include:

• Complex page layouts.
• Poor heading structure.
• Inaccessible uploaded documents.
• Improper table use.
• Embedded unsupported content.

SharePoint authors should:

• Use accessible templates.
• Maintain consistent page structure.
• Avoid excessive visual complexity.
• Ensure document accessibility before upload.

Agencies should establish governance for:

• Approved web parts and components.
• Accessible templates.
• Standardized authoring practices.

WordPress accessibility varies significantly depending on:

• Themes.
• Plugins.
• Page builders.
• Customizations.

Common WordPress risks include:

• Inaccessible plugins.
• Poorly coded themes.
• Drag-and-drop builder accessibility issues.
• Missing form labels.
• Keyboard traps.

Federal teams using WordPress should:

• Use themes that have been evaluated and approved against organizational accessibility requirements.
• Limit plugin usage to accessible tools.
• Test third-party integrations.
• Train content authors on accessible authoring practices.