Case study · Docusign research · 2025–2026

Accessibility Risk Assessment Scorecard

Accessibility testing with people with disabilities, turned into one clear risk score. Their lived experience tells teams which issues to fix first.

  • 14+products assessed
  • 2025launched in March
  • 2+studies a month with testers with disabilities
  • 3risk levels: high, medium, and low
Role
Accessibility Designer and researcher
Partners
Docusign’s Accessibility and XD Research teams, the product team behind each assessment, and testers with disabilities through Fable

Overview

Accessibility findings arrived as long reports: hard to compare, and easy to deprioritize.

The problem

Every study read differently, so teams couldn’t tell at a glance how risky a product was for the people using it, or which issues mattered most to customers.

The goal

Give every product the same one-page summary: how people using assistive technology actually experienced it, and how much risk that creates for customers, so the most critical issues get prioritized.

A scorecard summary: an accessibility score of 83 in a green ring, an Accessibility badge reading Low Risk, bars for Usefulness 86%, Satisfaction 86%, and Usability 90%, and an overall score of 88% with a Pass badge.
The scorecard summary: an accessibility risk score beside usefulness, satisfaction, and usability, rolled up into one overall result.

My part

  • Designed the scorecard, its risk score, and the risk badges, as the team’s accessibility designer and researcher.
  • Synthesized research with Fable participants into recommendations teams could act on.
  • Shared the badges widely, which helped escalate critical customer issues so they were prioritized.

How it works

Each scorecard summarizes a study with participants who use assistive technology.

The scorecard grew out of research with Fable, bringing screen reader, screen magnifier, cognitive, and alternative navigation findings together into one result. Sharing the risk badges brought those results to people well beyond the accessibility team.

An Accessibility Risk Assessment report with the product name and findings blurred. Readable: the Accessibility Score and Findings heading with a High Risk 29.3 badge; ratings of Great, Needs improvement, and Very poor; a JIRA link; a Detailed Results Summary in Fable link; Task and Customer quote headings; and a Risk Score Details card reading “High Risk (under 60): Caution for products that are targeted towards Financial Services or Federal customers, as there is more scrutiny around accessibility.”
An example of an internal scorecard, with real product data removed.

The score

  • A risk score and badge for one of three levels: high, medium, or low risk. Each level’s threshold explains what the score means for customers in regulated industries like financial services and government.
  • Task completion: how many participants completed a product’s critical flows with their assistive technology.

The evidence

  • Findings by assistive technology, such as screen readers, screen magnifiers, cognitive accessibility, and alternative navigation, each rated and backed by participants’ own words.
  • Links to the work: tickets for each issue and the full research results.