Germany's federal accessibility monitoring body tested 7,239 public websites and 269 apps in 2022–2024, more than triple the previous cycle — finding not one fully accessible, though accessibility-statement publication rose from 36% to 48%.
7239 websites
Websites tested (2nd cycle) (2022-2024)
1892 websites
Websites tested (1st cycle) (2020-2021)
269 apps
Apps tested (2nd cycle) (2022-2024)
57 apps
Apps tested (1st cycle) (2020-2021)
0
Websites or apps fully meeting all accessibility requirements (2022-2024)
51-82 %
Website WCAG-principle compliance range (2022-2024)
36 to 48 %
Accessibility statement publication rate (1st to 2nd cycle)
State-level (Länder) average compliance (2022-2024)
Details
Maturity
Established
Promoter
Überwachungsstelle des Bundes für Barrierefreiheit von Informationstechnik (BFIT-Bund)
Period
2022–2024
Region (NUTS)
DE30
Keywords
public sector, digital accessibility, e-government, disability rights
Context
Under the EU Web Accessibility Directive ((EU) 2016/2102), Germany's Überwachungsstelle des Bundes für Barrierefreiheit von Informationstechnik (BFIT-Bund), an independent Berlin-based unit, monitors federal and Länder public-sector websites and apps against BITV 2.0 and EN 301 549/WCAG 2.1.
Objectives
To track, cycle over cycle, whether German public-sector digital accessibility is actually improving, and to identify where compliance and accessibility-statement quality still fall short.
Activities
For its second reporting cycle (1 January 2022 – 22 December 2024), BFIT-Bund and the Länder monitoring bodies tested 7,239 websites (322 in depth) and 269 apps — more than triple the 1,892 websites (130 in depth) and 57 apps tested in the first cycle (2020/21). BFIT-Bund also runs mandatory repeat inspections covering at least 10% of the previous cycle's sample, per EU rules.
Results
Not a single tested website or app fully met all accessibility requirements in either cycle. Website compliance with the four WCAG principles ranged from 51% (robustness) to 82% (understandability and operability); in-depth app monitoring found robustness as low as 37.5%. State-level bodies had the highest average compliance (74%, up marginally from 73%). Publication of the legally required accessibility statement rose from 36% to 48% of sites, but only 13.5% of statements fully met the formal requirements. Repeat inspections of previously tested sites found "in most cases no significantly improved results."
Conclusions
BFIT-Bund attributes the limited progress largely to the long development and update cycles of public websites and apps — a structural constraint on how quickly statutory monitoring alone can raise compliance, even at a tripled testing scale.
Implementation
Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M) — Testing scaled more than threefold between cycles (1,892 to 7,239 websites; 57 to 269 apps) across federal and all 16 Länder bodies, implying substantial and growing monitoring resourcing.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years)
Staffing & skills
BFIT-Bund (federal monitoring unit, Berlin), Länder-level monitoring bodies across all 16 states, structured input from four national disability organisations
Conditions for success
A legal, recurring monitoring obligation under EU Directive (EU) 2016/2102 with a fixed reporting cycle
Dedicated federal and Länder monitoring bodies with a defined, repeatable methodology (BITV 2.0 / EN 301 549 / WCAG 2.1)
Mandatory repeat inspections (≥10% of the prior cycle's sample) to check whether flagged sites actually improved
Structured feedback loops with disability organisations to prioritise persistent barriers
Common failure modes
Not one of thousands of tested websites or apps fully met all requirements in either cycle
Repeat inspections of previously flagged sites mostly found no significant improvement, attributed to long website/app development and update cycles
Only 13.5% of published accessibility statements fully met the formal requirements, even after publication rates rose
Commonly funded by
National / regional programmes
Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.
Do you run this practice?
Claim it —
verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.
Data sources
Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.
Malta's Communications Authority, assisted by FITA, audits public-sector sites and apps under the EU Web Accessibility Directive. Its 2022-2024 report …