Most venues know more about their accessibility than their website manages to say, and some know less than they think. An audit replaces both problems with figures: what was measured, on what date, against a protocol anyone can read.
A trained verifier attends and measures your building against the published protocol: entrance and threshold heights, clear door widths, lift car dimensions, turning space, gradients, surfaces, accessible toilet layout, sensory and hearing provision, and the step-free route from the nearest station. You receive every figure with the instrument used, photographs and the date, in a format you can hand to an architect or a contractor.
The audit output becomes your profile on this site: attributes, sources, retrieval or measurement dates, and a transparent score derived only from those attributes. It publishes in English, Spanish, French, Italian and Portuguese, so a traveller researching in their own language reads the same figures. The provenance label changes from compiled to verified once the measurements are ours.
A prioritised list of changes ranked by how much real access each one buys, with an indication of relative cost and effort. It usually surprises people. A 15 mm threshold strip, moving a bin that blocks a transfer space, or replacing a heavy door closer often matters more to more visitors than the capital project already in the budget.
A short, practical document for front-of-house teams: where the accessible entrance and toilet are, how to deploy the ramp, what to say when the lift is out, and which questions to ask instead of assuming. Most complaints about accessibility describe a staff interaction rather than a building, and this is the cheapest part of any audit to act on.
Four stages, typically four to six weeks from first contact to published profile, depending on the size of the site and how much documentation already exists.
The report is written to be usable by three different readers: the general manager who needs to know what to fix first, the architect who needs dimensions, and the front-of-house manager who needs to brief a team on Monday. Every figure states the instrument used and the date recorded, so nothing in it has to be taken on trust.
This is the part we will not negotiate. Paying for an audit buys measurement, evidence and advice. It does not buy a score, a ranking, a favourable adjective or the removal of an inconvenient finding. If your building has two steps at the entrance, the profile will say so, in five languages, with the riser height. We are aware this makes the commercial conversation harder, and we accept that cost, because the only asset this site has is a reader’s reasonable belief that the figures were not arranged. Independence is not a value we display. It is the product.
For a city, region or tourist board we can assess a portfolio of venues against the same protocol and report on the picture rather than the individual building: how much of the visitor offer is step-free, where the accessible transport network breaks down, which districts have no compliant accessible toilet within reasonable range, and which interventions would lift the most venues at once. The data is comparable between cities because the protocol does not change, which makes it usable for baselining, for tracking progress across a funding cycle, and for evidencing accessible tourism strategy with figures instead of intentions.
About one in six people worldwide lives with a significant disability, and that figure understates the travelling market considerably. Add older travellers with reduced mobility or stamina, people recovering from surgery, families pushing buggies, and anyone with a hearing or visual impairment, and you are looking at a substantial share of visitors for whom a step at the door is a decision point. Commonly cited estimates put the annual spending power of disabled households in the UK alone in the hundreds of billions.
The party size is the part venues tend to miss. A disabled traveller rarely books alone: partners, companions, carers and children book with them, so losing one guest usually means losing two to four. Access-led bookings also behave well commercially. They are researched carefully, decided in advance, less price-driven than the average, more likely to travel outside peak season, and unusually loyal — a hotel that worked once gets booked again rather than gambled against.
There is a risk dimension as well, though it is the weaker argument. Accessibility legislation across Europe and beyond sets duties around reasonable adjustment and, increasingly, published information; a measured record of what your building offers and what you are improving is a more comfortable position than a general assurance. But the stronger case remains the plain one: a visitor who can find out in advance that they can get in will come, and one who cannot will book somewhere else without telling you why.
Certification from us records that a trained verifier measured your building on a stated date against a published protocol, and that the results reached a defined threshold. It is a statement about evidence and a moment in time. It does not certify that every visitor will have a good experience, that the lift will be working next Tuesday, or that your team will handle every request well. No badge can promise those things, and one that implies it is selling reassurance rather than information.
It also does not mean legal compliance. Building regulations and equality law vary by country and are matters for your regulator and your lawyers. Our protocol is written around what a traveller physically encounters, which sometimes sets a higher bar than a local code and occasionally a different one. A venue can be fully compliant and still score modestly with us, usually because the accessible route is technically present but practically awkward.
What certification does provide is a claim that can be checked. The protocol is public, the thresholds are published, the figures are yours to show, and the expiry date is visible. A traveller can see what was measured and when, and decide for themselves. That is a narrower promise than most accessibility badges make, and it is the reason ours is worth displaying.
We quote a fixed fee at the scoping call, based on the number of buildings, floors and public routes in scope rather than an hourly rate. A single hotel or mid-sized attraction is a straightforward engagement; a station, a campus or a portfolio of venues is priced per site. The fee covers the visit, the evidenced report, the roadmap and the staff briefing pack.
No. The score is calculated from the recorded attributes using fixed weights, and no commercial relationship changes it. The only way it rises is for the underlying figures to change: widen the door, remove the step, install the accessible toilet, then ask us to remeasure. We publish the score we calculate, including when it is lower than a client hoped.
On-site work runs from half a day for a single small venue to two days for a large or complex site. The full engagement, from scoping call to published profile, is typically four to six weeks, with most of that time spent on the report and your review of it rather than on the visit itself.
You get the findings first, in full, with a prioritised plan for addressing them and an honest view of what is cheap and what is not. We do not withhold or soften results, but we also do not publish them as a verdict: the profile records what exists, and it is updated when you fix things. Several roadmap items are usually achievable within a week.