Skip to main content
Accessibility

Accessibility statement

Where this site stands against WCAG 2.1 Level AA, how we tested it, what still falls short, and how we build accessibility into the systems we deliver for clients.

Standard:WCAG 2.1 AAStatement date:August 19, 2026Last evaluated:August 19, 2026
01

Commitment and scope

Accessibility is part of how we build software, not a step we add at the end. We hold our own site to the standard we apply to client deliverables, because a firm that sells Section 508 and WCAG conformance should be able to demonstrate it on its own property.

This statement applies to the public pages of rainier.software. The invite-only contractor portal is out of scope and has not been evaluated to the same standard, which is recorded under known limitations rather than left unsaid.

02

Conformance status

We measure against the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA. Where a federal contract applies we also report against Section 508, which incorporates WCAG Level AA as its technical baseline. Outside federally applicable work we reference WCAG 2.1 AA directly.

Conformance status
Partially conformant with WCAG 2.1 Level AA

Partially conformant means most of the standard is met, with the exceptions listed under known limitations. The evaluation below found no outstanding failures. We still claim partial rather than full conformance for one specific reason: this site has not been driven with screen reader software itself, only with the accessibility tree that software reads. We will not claim full conformance ahead of the testing that supports it.

03

Measures we take

Accessibility is treated as a design input rather than a remediation task:

  • Conformance in the component layer. Focus management, labelling, contrast, and keyboard interaction are handled once in shared components, so every screen inherits them.
  • Colour decided by measurement. Every foreground token is checked against both background surfaces with the WCAG relative luminance formula, not chosen by eye. The measured values are published below.
  • Motion is a preference, not a default. Animation is disabled site-wide for anyone whose system requests reduced motion, and no part of the site requires motion to operate.
  • Keyboard parity. A skip link is the first focus stop on every page, and horizontally scrolling regions such as data tables are reachable and operable by keyboard.

Accountability for this statement, the remediation backlog, and responses to accessibility feedback sits with Gianluca Vaccarini, Founder & Software Engineer.

04

Technical specifications

Accessibility of this site relies on the following technologies working with your browser and any assistive technology you use:

  • HTML
  • WAI-ARIA
  • CSS
  • JavaScript

These are relied upon for conformance with the standard above. The public pages are statically rendered, so content, navigation links, and contact details remain readable where JavaScript is unavailable.

05

How we evaluated this

This statement is based on a self-evaluation completed on August 19, 2026. It has not been audited by a third party. Automated rule scanning catches only part of what matters, so the evaluation also inspects the browser accessibility tree directly, which is the same structure assistive technology reads through platform APIs.

Every check below was executed against this site. The results are stated so you can hold us to them rather than take a conformance badge on trust.

Automated rule scan

axe-core across 11 page templates at desktop and mobile viewports, covering the WCAG 2.0 A/AA, WCAG 2.1 A/AA, and best-practice rule sets.

No violations
Accessible names

Every interactive node in the browser accessibility tree, the same tree screen readers consume through platform APIs, checked for a non-empty accessible name.

0 unnamed controls
Landmarks

Verified that banner, navigation, main, and contentinfo are each present, correctly nested, and uniquely named on every template.

Complete on all templates
Heading structure

Document-order check for exactly one h1 per page and no skipped heading levels.

No skips
Link purpose

Checked for links sharing an accessible name while pointing to different destinations, which is ambiguous out of context.

None found
Keyboard operation

Tabbed through every template recording each stop, checking for focus traps, for a visible focus indicator on every stop, and that focus order preserves reading order.

No traps, focus visible throughout
Contrast

Every foreground token measured against both background surfaces using the WCAG relative luminance formula.

All pass 4.5:1
Reflow

Every template rendered at 320 CSS pixels, checking for horizontal scrolling and loss of content.

No horizontal scroll
Reduced motion

Confirmed that a reduced-motion system preference stops all animation, including the looping client strip.

Honoured site-wide

Measured contrast

Ratios against the darker of the two background surfaces. WCAG 1.4.3 requires 4.5:1 for normal text.

TokenValueRatioResult
--fg#ededf016.74:1Pass
--fg-bright#c9ccd212.16:1Pass
--brand-fg#a8c9d811.19:1Pass
--fg-muted#9aa0aa7.43:1Pass
--fg-subtle#8b8f986.04:1Pass
--fg-dim#81858e5.29:1Pass
--fg-faint#777b834.61:1Pass
06

Assistive technology we test against

Behaviour differs by pairing, so we name combinations rather than claiming general support. The accessibility tree these readers consume has been inspected and verified, as recorded above. Driving each reader directly is scheduled and has not yet been performed, so no row below claims otherwise.

Screen readerBrowserPlatformStatus
NVDAFirefoxWindowsScheduled
JAWSChromeWindowsScheduled
VoiceOverSafarimacOSScheduled
VoiceOverSafariiOSScheduled
TalkBackChromeAndroidScheduled

Browsers are considered at their current and previous major versions. Combinations outside this matrix, such as Dragon, ZoomText, and Narrator, are out of scope for this statement.

07

Known limitations

Each entry states what falls short, why, and either a workaround or what we are doing about it.

Limitation 01
What falls short
This site has not been driven with screen reader software itself.
Why
We verified the accessibility tree that NVDA, JAWS, VoiceOver, and TalkBack read through platform APIs, and every interactive control in it is correctly named and structured. What that cannot tell us is how each reader announces a page in practice: verbosity, virtual cursor behaviour, and table navigation differ between them.
Workaround or fix
This is the sole reason we claim partial rather than full conformance. Passes with the pairings listed above are scheduled for the next review cycle and the results will be published in this section. If you hit a problem with a specific reader before then, the feedback channel below reaches an engineer.
Limitation 02
What falls short
The scrolling client strip on the home page has no always-visible pause control.
Why
It animates continuously for longer than five seconds, which WCAG 2.2.2 asks users to be able to stop.
Workaround or fix
The animation stops entirely for anyone whose system requests reduced motion, and pauses on hover for pointer users. A persistent pause button is a tracked change.
Limitation 03
What falls short
The downloadable capability statement PDF is not verified as tagged for accessibility.
Why
It is produced outside this codebase and has not been checked for reading order, tagging, or alternative text.
Workaround or fix
The same information is on the capability statement page in accessible HTML. We will supply a tagged PDF or an alternative format on request within two business days.
Limitation 04
What falls short
The authenticated contractor portal is outside the scope of this statement.
Why
It is invite-only and not part of the public site. It has not been evaluated to the same standard.
Workaround or fix
Disclosed here rather than silently excluded. Contractors who encounter a barrier should use the feedback channel below and we will address it directly.
08

How we build accessibility for clients

Client engagements follow the same method, applied earlier and more thoroughly:

  • Enforced once, inherited everywhere. We build or harden a shared component layer so keyboard interaction, focus management, semantics, and contrast are correct at the source, rather than each screen re-solving them.
  • Requirements traced to criteria. Acceptance criteria reference specific WCAG success criteria, so conformance is verifiable in review rather than asserted at the end.
  • Automated plus manual. Automated checks on every change, with manual keyboard and screen reader passes at feature completion and before release.
  • Remediation with evidence. For existing systems we produce a prioritised finding list with severity, affected criteria, and reproduction steps, then fix in dependency order.
  • Documentation and handover. Patterns, testing procedures, and the component contract are documented so your team sustains conformance after we leave.

Where a project is federally applicable we report against Section 508. Elsewhere we hold to WCAG 2.1 AA.

09

Conformance reports (ACR / VPAT)

We produce Accessibility Conformance Reports on the ITI VPAT template, covering the Section 508, EN 301 549, or WCAG editions as the buyer requires, both for this site and as a deliverable for client systems we build or audit.

Request one from hello@rainier.software. A report for this site reflects the evaluation described above, including the limitations, rather than a claim we have not tested.

10

Feedback

If you encounter a barrier on this site, tell us and we will fix it. Include the page address, what you were trying to do, and the browser and assistive technology you were using.

hello@rainier.software · +1 (253) 314-6686

We respond within one business day and will tell you either the fix or the timeline for it. If you need content from this site in an alternative format, we will provide it at no cost.

11

Escalation

If our response is unsatisfactory, escalate to Gianluca Vaccarini, Founder & Software Engineer, at hello@rainier.software. Escalations are acknowledged within two business days with a decision and the reasoning behind it.

Matters arising under a federal contract may also be raised through the contracting officer for that contract.

12

Statement dates

  • Statement prepared: August 19, 2026
  • Last reviewed: August 19, 2026
  • Last evaluated: August 19, 2026, by self-evaluation
  • Review cadence: Every 12 months, and after any substantial change to the site

This statement is prepared by Rainier Software Solutions LLC and reviewed on the cadence above, so a reader can tell how current it is.