Website audit report template — the sections, in order
There is no file to download here. This page gives you the section list, and a complete filled-in example you can print or save as a PDF and copy the structure from.
The sections, and why each one is there
Eight sections, in this order. Any client-ready audit report needs all eight; drop one and the client either cannot check your work or cannot act on it.
- 1
Header: which site, which URL, when, and who ran it
A client has to be able to tell which page the document is about and which day it describes, without asking you. Put the exact URL, the date and time of the run, and your name on it — and if you run it again next quarter, that header is what makes the two reports comparable.
- 2
Scores: overall, and one per category
A single number gives the client something to hold on to and something to beat next time. Showing it broken into categories stops it being a black box — a client who sees speed lagging behind accessibility already knows where the argument will be.
- 3
What was checked, and what couldn't run
This is the section that keeps the whole document honest. It states the boundary of what follows: which checks ran, which were skipped, and why. Without it, a missing finding looks like a pass, and the first person who checks your report against the page finds the gap.
- 4
Findings grouped by category, each with its evidence
The evidence is the element, header or value that was actually seen — the image tag with no alt attribute, the header name and value, the URL that answered 404 with the status code. A client, or their developer, can check any single finding against the live page without trusting you.
- 5
A severity on every finding
An unsorted list of forty findings is an argument. Severity turns it into a queue: the client with two hours of developer time knows what to do first, and you have a defensible reason for saying so.
- 6
A plain-English fix for each finding
This is the difference between a complaint and a quote. Each fix says what to change, in words the client can read and the developer can act on — and it is the part a client forwards internally without editing.
- 7
A “fix these first” priority list
The same findings, ordered, with the reason for the order stated. This is the section the work gets scoped from: it is the difference between handing over a diagnosis and handing over a plan.
- 8
Scope and limits
Say what the method cannot see, on the document itself. Automation does not test colour contrast, keyboard use, screen-reader behaviour or content quality, and no automated report is a compliance certification. Stating that protects your client from a false sense of safety and protects you from a claim you cannot support.
The complete example
Every one of those sections, filled in, on a real public site — www.debian.org, checked on 25 Sept 2026, 02:01 UTC.
It is a real, unedited report: 16 findings across 5 categories, every score from the checks that ran, nothing chosen for show. The site's owner did not commission it, is not a customer and has not endorsed ProofHive — it is public so you can check the findings yourself in another tab. Expect small differences if you re-run it: pages change and a link that worked last week can break.
Open the complete sample audit report →Printing it (Cmd/Ctrl-P) or saving it as a PDF gives you the document your client would receive.
Copying the structure from that page is the whole point of this one. It is the same document a buyer opens from the private link we email them after paying — nothing is hidden in the paid version, only produced for their own site.
Template vs automated report vs manual audit
Three different products that get sold under the same three words. Every price below is a published price we read on the vendor's own page on 25 Sep 2026, with the URL next to it — they change, so check before you quote a client.
| What it is | What it costs | What it proves | What it cannot prove |
|---|---|---|---|
| A template (this page) | Free. This page is the section list; there is nothing to download and nothing to pay. We have no price data for templates and will not invent one — the phrases buyers type are “audit report template free download”, which is a fair sign the format is given away rather than sold. | Nothing about the site. A template is a structure with no checks in it — it cannot find a single problem. | Prove, disprove or measure anything. It also cannot fill itself in: every finding in a template has to come from somewhere. |
| An automated report (what this site produces) | $49 one-off for the full document. The published comparables we could read on 25 Sep 2026 sit either side of it: WAVE's API at $0.04/credit (1 credit ≈ 1 page, 100 free) — wave.webaim.org/api/; Pope Tech free for 25 pages, then from $25/mo — popetech.com/pricing; AccessibilityChecker $69–$119 per domain per month — accessibilitychecker.org/pricing/; SEOptimer's white-label tier $39/mo — seoptimer.com/pricing; SEO Site Checkup Professional (labelled “for SEO agencies”) $129/mo — seositecheckup.com/pricing. | What the delivered markup actually contains, with the evidence for each finding, for the checks that ran — and it says which checks those were. | Test colour contrast, keyboard use, screen-reader behaviour or content quality, and cannot certify compliance with WCAG, ADA or any other standard. |
| A manual audit | Quote only. We could not find a published price for a manual or WCAG audit anywhere on 25 Sep 2026 — Silktide states it prices by organisation size and prefers to talk first (silktide.com/pricing/), Deque publishes no axe Monitor pricing page, Siteimprove's /pricing/ redirects to its homepage, and AudioEye's pricing page was unreachable from our network. Treat any figure you have not read on a vendor's own page as unverified. | The experience of using the site: contrast on the rendered page, keyboard order and focus, what a screen reader announces, and whether the content makes sense — none of which is visible in markup. | Guarantee legal compliance either. It is human work with human scope, and whether a site meets a legal standard is a judgement about the law as well as the site. |
Note what the three rows have in common: none of them can promise a client that a site is compliant. The difference is how much of the site each one can actually see, and how much the client can check for themselves.
The parts an automated report can't write for you
A tool can produce findings, evidence, severity and fixes. Three things in a good client report are still yours, and they are the parts a client is actually paying the agency for:
Your commentary
Which findings matter for this client's site, which are noise, and what the pattern says. A report of forty findings with no opinion attached reads like a machine wrote it, because one did.
The client's priorities
A charity's contact form and a retailer's checkout are not the same risk. Weigh the findings against what the client actually depends on — the automated order is a starting point, not the order the work should be done in.
Scoping the remediation
Turning “fix these first” into days, a price and a plan — including the manual audit for the parts automation cannot see. That is a piece of judgement about a client's developer, budget and deadline, and no template contains it.
The template is free — the report is $49
Use this page's structure for nothing. When you want the findings that go in it, run the free check on a client's page — that is the same check the paid report runs — and order the finished document when you need something to hand over: every finding, its evidence, its fix and a prioritised order, on one site, printable.
Get the full report by email — $49
We email your report within one working day of your payment. If we can't produce your report, you get your money back in full.
Not ready to pay? Then don't: run the free accessibility checker first, and read the complete sample report (print or PDF) to see exactly what the document looks like.
FAQ
Is there a file to download — Word, Google Docs, InDesign, PowerPoint?
No, and there is no such file anywhere on this site. This page is the template: the section list above, in order, with the reason each section exists. The complete example on this site is a web page you can read, print (Cmd/Ctrl-P) or save as a PDF, and the structure you print is the structure to copy. We would rather give you the list than a forty-megabyte download you have to fight with.
Can I use this structure in my own reports, and charge for them?
Yes. Copy the section list, put your own branding on it, and charge whatever your work is worth. We are not asking for attribution for a list of section headings. What you cannot do is present our findings as your own audit if you did not run them — if you use the $49 report, the findings in it came from our checks and the report says so.
Why is the example report from a site you don't own?
Because it is real and unedited. www.debian.org is a public site whose page we scanned on 25 Sept 2026, 02:01 UTC with the same scanner that runs here, and every score, finding, piece of evidence and fix on that page came out of that one run — nothing was cleaned up for show. Its owner did not commission the report, is not a customer and has not endorsed us; it was chosen because anyone can open the site in another tab and check the findings. A sample built from our own site would prove nothing.
What this audit is — and isn't
These are automated checks on the page as delivered to our scanner at the moment it ran. Accessibility findings come from the markup only — we do not test colour contrast, keyboard use or screen-reader behaviour — so this is a readiness audit and a prioritised to-do list, not legal advice and not a guarantee or certification of WCAG, ADA or any other compliance standard.