Making PDFs Accessible Under Title II of the ADA: A Guide for Public Entities

Published on: | by

Public entities, from state and local governments to special districts like water or fire departments, rely on PDFs to convey information and communicate with the public. But inaccessible PDFs can exclude individuals with disabilities, risking noncompliance with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). With new accessibility rules in effect, the clock is ticking—larger entities face an April 24, 2026, deadline, while smaller ones and special districts have until April 26, 2027.

Below we discuss the legal requirements and highlight possible solutions to ensure compliance, including Streamline’s new DocAccess tool.

The Legal Landscape: Title II and Subpart H Requirements

Title II of the ADA (42 U.S.C. §§ 12131–12165) prohibits public entities—state and local governments, their agencies, and special districts—from denying individuals with disabilities access to services, programs, or activities (42 U.S.C. § 12132). The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) regulations at 28 CFR Part 35 enforce this mandate, with Subpart H (effective June 24, 2024) specifically requiring digital access such as website and PDF accessibility (89 FR 31320).

Key Provisions of Subpart H

  • WCAG 2.1 Level AA Standard: Web content and mobile apps must conform to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA, covering perceivability, operability, understandability, and robustness (28 CFR § 35.200(a)).
  • PDFs as Web Content: PDFs are “web content” and “conventional electronic documents” and must comply unless covered by exceptions (28 CFR § 35.104).
  • Exceptions: Preexisting documents not used for public participation, archived content, and third-party content may be exempt (§ 35.201(b)–(f)).
  • Compliance Deadlines: April 24, 2026, for entities with populations ≥50,000; April 26, 2027, for smaller entities and special districts (§ 35.200(b)).
  • Enforcement: Noncompliance risks DOJ investigations or private lawsuits, with remedies including remediation or settlements (42 U.S.C. § 12133).

The DOJ emphasizes that inaccessible digital content mirrors physical barriers, undermining equal access (89 FR 31320, 31321). For special districts, compliance is critical to serve all customers and avoid costly litigation.

What Makes a PDF Accessible?

An accessible PDF works seamlessly with assistive technologies like screen readers for blind users (e.g., JAWS). Per WCAG 2.1 Level AA, it must:

  • Be Perceivable: Include alt-text for images (Success Criterion 1.1.1) and sufficient contrast (1.4.3).
  • Be Operable: Use tagged headings and descriptive links for navigation (1.3.1, 2.4.6).
  • Be Understandable: Follow a logical reading order with language attributes (3.1.1).
  • Be Robust: Align with PDF/UA-1 standards for compatibility (4.1.1).

Challenges: PDFs vs. HTML

PDFs pose unique hurdles compared to HTML. PDFs are often exported from print tools and lack HTML’s dynamic tagging. Retrofitting scanned or untagged PDFs (e.g., agendas) is labor-intensive. Special districts and other public entities often manage huge volumes of legacy PDFs, with remediation being charged by the page. This makes remediating large volumes of PDFs very costly. Direct PDF remediation is often unrealistic for public entities, leading some to remove public access for everyone rather than risk noncompliance. This is a major loss for the entire public and likely not necessary.

Solutions to PDF Remediation (DocAccess)

With the development of AI in recent years, tools are beginning to emerge that make automated and compliant PDF remediation possible. Perhaps the best example so far is Streamline’s DocAccess, which converts PDFs into WCAG 2.1 AA-compliant HTML versions using AI and JavaScript. It doesn’t change the original PDF; it displays in interactive HTML version of the PDF in a window that allows blind and disabled users to read and access the PDF’s content in an accessible HTML format.

The main advantage is the cost savings. It is orders of magnitude cheaper to remediate PDFs using software than manual human work and it is clearly the future. It is much faster to remediate via software too, which is critical for publications like agendas, which often must be posted at least 72 hours in advance of a board meeting. What could have taken 2-3 days to manually remediate a board packet can now be down in 5-10 minutes and made available to everyone instantly thereafter. It also includes additional features that would not be found even on a fully accessible version of the PDF like the ability to ask questions about the content or translate it into a different language.

Legal Compliance

Does software-based PDF remediation comply with Title II of the ADA? Thankfully, Title II of the ADA does not specify how web content like PDFs are made accessible. It just requires that they are. Many people are aware of the hazards of relying too much on software-based website accessibility solutions. Companies like accessiBe, AudioEye, Userway and others have offered software overlay tools that claim to make entire websites accessible instantly. These products often fail to meet expectations and leave customers on the hook for ADA liability. But DocAccess is doing something different and much more specific. Instead of attempting to make an entire website ADA compliant, DocAccess is focused only on PDFs. This is a much more solvable problem with current software capabilities. Early indications and my personal exposure show excellent results and great promise remediating PDFs with DocAccess.

Does offering an HTML version of the PDF comply with Title II ADA requirements if the original PDF is still inaccessible?

Under Title II of the ADA, a public entity may use conforming alternate versions of web content… where it is not possible to make web content directly accessible due to technical or legal limitations” (28 CFR § 35.202(a); emphasis added). In many situations, technical or legal limitations permit an alternative version such HTML.

Additionally, Title II of the ADA does not require that web content comply with WCAG 2.1 if doing so would create “undue financial and administrative burdens.” 28 CFR § 35.200. If it is not feasible due to staff and budget constraints to convert thousands of pages of old PDFs into accessible versions by hand, then the requirements of the law are relaxed and alternative solutions like DocAccess that provide excellent accessibility without undue burdens would likely be permitted under the law.

Additionally, 28 CFR § 35.203 is titled “Equivalent facilitation” and states that “Nothing in this subpart prevents the use of designs, methods, or techniques as alternatives to those prescribed, provided that the alternative designs, methods, or techniques result in substantially equivalent or greater accessibility and usability of the web content or mobile app.” As I understand it, DocAccess also the accessible HTML version as well as live human interpreter support if needed. Thus, if DocAccess overall provides equivalent or greater accessibility compared to direct remediation of the original PDF, then this exception could also apply.

Lastly, Subpart H provides an exception in circumstances of noncompliance that have a minimal impact on access. Specifically, 28 CFR § 35.205 states that “A public entity that is not in full compliance … will be deemed to have met the requirements of § 35.200 in the limited circumstance in which the public entity can demonstrate that the noncompliance has such a minimal impact on access that it would not affect the ability of individuals with disabilities to use the public entity’s web content or mobile app to do any of the following in a manner that provides substantially equivalent timeliness, privacy, independence, and ease of use.” The statute then lists several criteria, such as access to the same info, same interactions, same transactions, and same participation in services. If DocAccess can provide an accessible version of the same PDF without limiting the information or capabilities of users with disabilities, then this exception would also apply and permit its use under the law.

Conclusion

PDF accessibility under Title II is both a legal mandate and an opportunity to serve all constituents. It can be extremely slow and costly when done manually. Software solutions, particularly DocAccess, offers special districts and public entities a cost-effective, innovative path to compliance.

For more information or help with ADA compliance, contact Stuart Tubis, Esq. at skt@jmbm.com or 415-984-9622.