Sorting your accessibility audit report by severity ratings is the fastest way to focus remediation on what matters most. Open the audit report spreadsheet, locate the severity column (often labeled Severity, Impact, or Priority), and apply a sort filter from highest to lowest. Critical and high-severity issues rise to the top, giving your team a clear remediation queue. Most audit reports from accessibility consultants include severity ratings as a standard column, and platforms like Accessibility Tracker preserve these ratings when you import the report so you can sort, filter, and assign issues without losing context.
| Step | What to Do |
|---|---|
| Open the report | Use Excel, Google Sheets, or an accessibility project platform that accepts spreadsheet imports. |
| Locate severity column | Find the column named Severity, Impact, or Priority. Confirm the rating scale (Critical, High, Medium, Low). |
| Apply a sort | Sort descending so Critical and High issues appear at the top of the list. |
| Group by page or component | Add a secondary sort by URL or component to batch related fixes together. |
| Assign and track | Move the sorted list into a tracking platform so developers and QA can work through it in order. |
What Severity Ratings Actually Mean
Severity ratings indicate how much a given issue affects users with disabilities. A Critical rating usually points to a blocker, something that prevents a user from completing a core task, like a form that cannot be submitted with a keyboard or a checkout button that is not announced by a screen reader.
High-severity issues degrade the experience significantly but may have workarounds. Medium and Low cover issues that are real but less disruptive, such as minor label inconsistencies or cosmetic focus indicator issues.
The exact scale varies by auditor. Some use Critical, Serious, Moderate, Minor. Others use numeric scores. Read the audit report's introduction to confirm the rating definitions before you sort.
How Do You Sort an Audit Report in a Spreadsheet?
If your audit was delivered as an Excel or Google Sheets file, sorting takes under a minute. Select the header row, turn on filters, then click the dropdown arrow on the severity column and choose Sort Descending.
For a cleaner view, apply a custom sort with two levels: severity first, then WCAG success criterion or page URL. This keeps related issues grouped so a developer working on the header can fix every header issue in one pass.
Save the sorted version as a separate file. Never overwrite the original audit report. You may need to reference the original order later during validation.
Sorting Inside an Accessibility Project Platform
Spreadsheets work, but they fall apart once multiple people start editing. Accessibility Tracker Platform accepts an audit report import and keeps severity ratings intact as a native field. Once imported, you can sort by severity with a single click, filter by assignee, and track status as each issue moves from open to in-progress to validated.
The platform also supports Risk Factor or User Impact prioritization formulas, which layer additional signals on top of raw severity. That way a Medium-severity issue on your most-visited page can outrank a High-severity issue buried on a rarely-used admin screen.
Why Secondary Sorting Matters
A severity sort alone gives you a list of what to fix. A secondary sort by page, component, or WCAG criterion gives you a list of how to fix it efficiently.
Developers work faster when related issues are batched. Fixing five color contrast issues across the same component in one ticket is quicker than treating each as a separate task. Group your sorted list accordingly before handing it off.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Do not treat severity as the only input. A Critical issue affecting a page no one visits matters less than a High issue on your homepage. Page traffic and user flow context should factor into your remediation order.
Do not delete Low-severity issues to make the list look shorter. They still count toward WCAG conformance. Every issue identified in the audit needs to be addressed for full conformance at the target level.
Do not re-sort after remediation starts without preserving status. If you lose track of which issues have been fixed versus which are still open, you will duplicate work during validation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Should I fix all Critical issues before moving to High?
Generally yes, but not rigidly. If a Critical issue requires a two-week engineering effort and you have ten High issues that can be fixed in an afternoon, clearing the Highs in parallel makes sense. The goal is reducing user impact quickly, not following the sort order as a strict rule.
What if my audit report does not include severity ratings?
Ask the auditor to add them. Severity ratings are standard on any professional audit report. If the provider cannot supply them, that is a signal the audit may not be thorough enough. A report without severity context forces your team to guess at priorities.
Can I change the severity ratings assigned by the auditor?
You can adjust internal priorities based on your product context, but leave the auditor's original ratings intact for the record. Add a second column for your internal priority if you want to track both. This keeps the audit report defensible if you ever need to reference it for a VPAT, an ACR, or a legal matter.
How often should I re-sort as remediation progresses?
Re-sort whenever you close a batch of issues or bring in new ones from a follow-up evaluation. The active remediation list should always reflect current severity and status so the team is working on the highest-impact open items.
Sorting is the moment an audit report stops being a document and starts being a plan. Severity tells you where to start, and the right tracking setup keeps the work moving.