Essential Procurement Practices for Purchasing Accessible Technology

Ensuring that the technology your organization purchases is accessible to all users isn’t just a nice-to-have—it’s essential. But if you’re new to digital accessibility or procurement, the process can seem overwhelming. What documents should you request? How do you evaluate vendor claims? What does a good VPAT actually look like?

As procurement professionals, you’re already experts at evaluating products for cost, functionality, security, and support. Adding accessibility to that list doesn’t have to be complicated. This guide will walk you through the fundamentals of accessible procurement, with practical advice you can implement immediately.

Why Accessible Procurement Matters

Before diving into the how-to, let’s touch on why this matters:

• Legal Compliance: Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires federal and public agencies to make electronic and information technology accessible to people with disabilities. Many state and local governments follow similar guidelines to comply with Title II of the ADA.
• Risk Mitigation: Inaccessible products can expose your organization to legal risk, as we’ve seen with the increasing number of digital accessibility lawsuits.
• Market Expansion: Accessible products work better for everyone, including the 1 in 4 American adults who have some type of disability.
• Mission Alignment: Most organizations have diversity and inclusion goals—accessible procurement ensures your technology stack supports these values.

Understanding the Key Documents: VPATs and ACRs

The cornerstone of accessible procurement is understanding two critical documents: the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) and Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR).

What is a VPAT/ACR?

A VPAT is a document that explains how information and communication technology (ICT) products such as software, hardware, electronic content, and support documentation meet (or don’t meet) the Revised 508 Standards for IT accessibility.

An Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) is the completed VPAT document that a vendor provides. Think of the VPAT as the template and the ACR as the filled-out report.

Keep in mind that people use the terms ACR and VPAT interchangeably.  They often say VPAT when referring to a completed template.

Types of VPATs

There are four VPAT template versions, each serving different needs:

1. VPAT 2.5rev 508: For U.S. federal procurement (focused on Section 508 requirements)
2. VPAT 2.5rev EU: For European Union procurement (focused on EN 301 549)
3. VPAT 2.5rev WCAG: Focused specifically on WCAG 2.1 requirements
4. VPAT 2.5rev INT: The international template that combines all standards

When working with U.S. federal agencies or organizations that follow federal guidelines, you’ll want the VPAT 2.4rev 508 or the INT version that includes 508.

All other public agencies (non-federal) should ask for a WCAG VPAT. The WCAG VPAT/ACR is the best option if you are not sure what to ask for.

What to Request from Vendors

When evaluating technology for purchase, here’s what you can and/or should request from vendors:

Essential Documents

1. A current VPAT/ACR (less than 12 months old)*
2. Documentation of accessibility testing methodology
3. Accessibility roadmap for addressing known issues
4. User documentation in accessible formats

A current VPAT/ACR should be the minimum requirement!

Beyond the Paperwork

Don’t stop at just the documents. You can also request:

• A demonstration of the product working with assistive technologies like screen readers
• Access to a trial version for your own accessibility testing
• Customer references who can speak to the product’s accessibility in real-world use

Questions to Ask Vendors

Having the right conversation with vendors can reveal much more than what’s on paper. Here are key questions to ask:

About Their Process

1. “How is accessibility integrated into your development process?”
   • Good answer: “We perform accessibility testing throughout development with both automated tools and manual testing.”
   • Red flag: “We run an automated checker before release.”
2. “Who performs your accessibility testing?”
   • Good answer: “We use certified third-party accessibility professionals and also work with users with disabilities.”
   • Red flag: “Our developers check for issues.”

About Their Knowledge

3. “Can you explain how your product works with screen readers?”
   • Good answer: Detailed explanation of specific features that support screen reader functionality.
   • Red flag: Vague answers or unfamiliarity with screen readers.
4. “What WCAG success criteria are most challenging for your product, and how are you addressing them?”
   • Good answer: Honest identification of specific challenges and plans to address them.
   • Red flag: “We don’t have any issues” or inability to discuss specific WCAG criteria.

About Support and Updates

5. “How do you handle accessibility-related reports?”
   • Good answer: “We prioritize accessibility bugs in our regular development cycle.”
   • Red flag: “We address those in major updates only.”
6. “How do you ensure new features maintain accessibility?”
   • Good answer: “We have accessibility requirements in our design process and test before releasing.”
   • Red flag: “We fix issues if customers report them.”

How to Read a VPAT/ACR

A VPAT/ACR can be intimidating at first glance. Here’s how to navigate it effectively:

Understanding Conformance Levels

WCAG VPATs will be divided up into three levels of conformance. All three of which measure a degree of accessibility and build upon each other. Level A is the most basic level of accessibility. Level AA is the most comprehensive and Level AAA measures criteria that are unique and more advanced.

508 and EU VPATs are both built off of WCAG 2.0, an older version of WCAG (current version is WCAG 2.2). These VPATs are intended to show conformance to government requirements for both the European Union and the United States.

These VPATs will show both the older WCAG criteria AND the additional performance criteria for the EU and Section 508. As a result, these reports are longer.

VPAT Compliance Terms

VPATs use specific terms to indicate the level of compliance:

• Supports: The functionality fully meets the criterion.
• Partially Supports: Some functionality meets the criterion, but some may not.
• Does Not Support: Most functionality does not meet the criterion.
• Not Applicable: The criterion doesn’t apply to the product.
• Not Evaluated: The criterion hasn’t been evaluated.

A VPAT or ACR that uses anything other than the terms above should be considered questionable as these are the only acceptable terms for showing levels of conformance. It would indicate the authors are not familiar with VPATs and not accessibility professionals.

Remarks and Explanations

Each criterion on a VPAT/ACR should have a completed level of conformance (as above). Any criteria that is listed as Supports, Partially Supports, or Does Not Support should have an explanation given in the Remarks field. Look for examples and a detailed rationale as to why the level was given.

A blank Remarks field or one with a basic description usually means the testing was not thorough.

Key Sections to Focus On

1. Product Description: Confirms exactly what product and version is being evaluated.
2. Evaluation Methods Used: Reveals how thoroughly the product was tested.
3. Applicable Standards/Guidelines: Shows which accessibility standards were considered.
4. Terms: Defines any special terminology used in the report.
5. Tables: The detailed breakdown of how the product meets specific accessibility criteria.

Prioritizing What to Review

If you’re new to reviewing VPATs, focus on these critical areas:

1. Table 1: Success Criteria, Level A – These are the most basic accessibility requirements. Significant failures here should be a major concern.
2. Pay particular attention to these crucial criteria:
   • 1.1.1 Non-text Content (alt text for images)
   • 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (proper structure)
   • 2.1.1 Keyboard (functionality works without a mouse)
   • 2.4.3 Focus Order (logical navigation)
   • 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (form fields are clearly labeled)

Red Flags in VPATs/ACRs

Not all VPATs are created equal. Watch out for these warning signs:

Document Issues

• Outdated VPATs: If it’s more than 12-18 months old, it’s likely not accurate for the current version.
• Missing sections: All applicable sections should be completed.
• Generic responses: Look for specific details rather than boilerplate language.
• Too perfect: Beware of VPATs claiming “Supports” for every single criterion—this is extremely rare and often indicates inadequate testing.

Content Red Flags

• Excessive use of “Not Applicable”: This may indicate misunderstanding of the criteria.
• Minimal remarks for “Partially Supports”: These should explain exactly what works and what doesn’t.
• No mention of testing methodology: How they tested is as important as what they tested.
• Over-reliance on “Not Evaluated”: This suggests the vendor hasn’t fully assessed their product.

Common VPAT/ACR Patterns

With experience, you’ll start to recognize patterns in VPATs:

The Honest VPAT

Contains a mix of supports, partially supports, and some does not support findings. Includes detailed remarks explaining limitations and workarounds. This is actually a good sign—it shows thorough evaluation.

The Marketing VPAT

Overly positive with vague remarks. May have been created by the marketing team rather than accessibility professionals. Requires further verification.

The Outdated VPAT

References old versions of standards or products. May have been copied from a previous version without proper re-evaluation.

The Incomplete VPAT

Contains many “Not Evaluated” responses or missing sections. Suggests the accessibility evaluation was rushed or incomplete.

Navigating Section 508 and the 2024 DOJ Rule for ADA Title II Compliance

Government agencies and organizations that follow federal guidelines have specific procurement requirements related to Section 508. Additionally, state and local government entities now must navigate the Department of Justice’s 2024 ADA Title II regulations for web accessibility.

The 2024 DOJ Rule and Procurement

In March 2024, the Department of Justice issued a final rule clarifying that Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act requires state and local governments to make their websites and mobile applications accessible to people with disabilities. This rule:

• Establishes WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the technical standard for accessibility
• Requires covered entities to provide an accessibility statement
• Sets compliance deadlines (generally within 2 years, with 3 years for smaller entities)
• Impacts procurement decisions by requiring that new technology purchases meet accessibility standards

This rule significantly impacts procurement professionals at state and local government entities, who now must ensure that vendor products comply with these standards to avoid potential legal consequences.

Key Requirements

1. Market Research: You must identify what marketplace offerings exist that meet accessibility standards.
2. Acquisition Planning: Accessibility requirements should be included in planning.
3. Solicitation Development: RFPs and contracts must include accessibility requirements.
4. Source Selection: Accessibility should be evaluated when selecting vendors.

Exceptions and Documentation

Section 508 allows for certain exceptions:

• Undue Burden: When accessibility would impose significant difficulty or expense.
• Commercial Non-Availability: When accessible products meeting business needs aren’t available.
• National Security: When systems are used for intelligence or military activities.

These exceptions require formal documentation and approval, and don’t eliminate the need to provide accessible alternatives for users with disabilities.

The 2024 DOJ Rule similarly acknowledges that there may be situations where full compliance isn’t immediately possible, but expects organizations to have a plan for addressing these gaps.

Challenging Procurement Scenarios: What To Do When…

Even with the best intentions, procurement professionals often encounter situations where accessibility isn’t straightforward. Here’s how to handle some common scenarios:

1. When a Vendor Doesn’t Have a VPAT/ACR

You’ve found a product that seems perfect, but the vendor doesn’t have a VPAT or ACR. Can you still purchase it?

Options:

• Request that they create one: Many vendors are unfamiliar with VPATs but willing to create them. Point them to the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) VPAT resources.
• Conduct your own evaluation: If the vendor is amenable, you can test the product yourself or hire a third party to evaluate it against Section 508 or WCAG standards.
• Create a conditional agreement: Purchase with contractual requirements that the vendor complete a VPAT within a specified timeframe.
• Document the situation: If you must proceed, document the steps taken to evaluate accessibility, the business necessity, and plans for addressing gaps.

Legal Considerations: Under both Section 508 and the 2024 DOJ Rule, proceeding without accessibility documentation increases legal risk. For Title II entities under the new DOJ rule, purchasing inaccessible technology without proper documentation could later be viewed as a failure to comply with ADA requirements.

2. When the VPAT/ACR Shows an Inaccessible Product

Ironically, some vendors provide VPATs that indicates a lot of accessibility issues. Such as when you see  Level A and AA criteria that list a lot of Does Not Support or Partially Supports.

Options:

• Request accessibility issues be addressed: This is a reasonable request and can be telling about the vendor’s serious when it comes to ensuring their product is accessible.
• See it as a warning sign: A vendor who can’t produce an accessible product may not truly understand the requirements.
• Offer guidance: Provide resources on addressing accessible issues if the vendor seems open to making repairs.

What This Tells You: An inaccessible product often indicates a lack of expertise or attention to detail regarding accessibility, which may extend to their product.

3. When a Vendor Refuses to Address Accessibility Issues

You’ve identified accessibility issues in a product, but the vendor is unwilling to commit to fixing them.

Options:

• Evaluate the severity: Determine if the issues create significant barriers or merely inconveniences.
• Explore alternatives: If the issues are severe, investigate competitive products that may be more accessible.
• Leverage procurement power: Make accessibility requirements contractual, with penalties for non-compliance.
• Consider equivalent facilitation: Are there alternative ways to provide the same functionality accessibly?
• Escalate within the vendor organization: Sometimes accessibility advocates within the vendor company can help.

Legal Implications: For Title II entities under the 2024 DOJ Rule, knowingly procuring technology with unfixed accessibility issues could potentially be seen as deliberate non-compliance with the ADA.

4. Documenting Exceptions When There Are No Accessible Alternatives

Sometimes you have no choice but to procure an imperfect product due to business necessity.

How to Document an Exception:

1. Identify the specific accessibility standards that cannot be met
   • List the exact WCAG success criteria or Section 508 requirements that are problematic
2. Document market research
   • Evidence that you evaluated alternatives (include all VPATs reviewed)
   • Documentation showing why alternatives don’t meet business requirements
   • Record of communications with vendors about accessibility
3. Develop an accessibility plan
   • Alternative access methods for users with disabilities
   • Timeline for addressing issues or replacing with accessible alternatives
   • Interim accommodations for employees or public users
4. Get proper approvals
   • For federal agencies: Ensure the “requiring official” provides written determination
   • For state/local: Follow your organization’s exception process, involving legal counsel
   • Document the business justification thoroughly
5. Implement mitigations
   • Create process for handling accommodation requests
   • Develop alternative access methods when possible
   • Track issues for potential future remediation

Sample Exception Documentation Language:

“After thorough market research and evaluation of [X number] potential products, [Product Name] has been identified as the only solution that meets the essential business requirements of [specific functions]. While the product does not fully support [specific accessibility requirements], we have determined that no commercially available alternative exists that would meet both our business needs and accessibility requirements.

To mitigate the impact, we will implement the following accommodations: [list accommodations]. Additionally, we have secured commitment from the vendor to address [specific issues] in their product roadmap by [date], which we will monitor as part of our contract management process.”

Key Risk Management Strategies

When dealing with imperfect accessibility situations:

1. Document everything: Your decision-making process, alternatives considered, and rationale
2. Be transparent: Clearly communicate limitations to users and provide alternatives
3. Plan for improvement: Even when exceptions are necessary, have a strategy for eventual compliance
4. Minimize scope: Limit exceptions to only the specific components absolutely necessary
5. Review regularly: What’s unavailable today may have accessible alternatives tomorrow

Building Accessibility into Your Procurement Process

Rather than treating accessibility as a separate checklist, integrate it into your existing process:

During Planning

• Include accessibility requirements in your needs assessment
• Consult with accessibility experts within your organization
• Research market options with accessibility in mind
• Consider the 2024 DOJ Rule requirements if you’re a state or local government entity

During Solicitation

• Include specific accessibility requirements in RFPs
• Request VPATs/ACRs as part of proposal submissions
• Make accessibility a weighted factor in evaluation criteria
• Require vendors to address how they’ll remediate any known issues

During Evaluation

• Review VPATs/ACRs with accessibility expertise (internal or external)
• Test products with assistive technologies when possible
• Compare accessibility across competing products
• Document findings thoroughly for compliance records

After Purchase

• Include accessibility in acceptance testing
• Document any issues for future reference
• Create a plan for addressing accessibility gaps
• Establish monitoring procedures to ensure ongoing compliance

Case Study: Procurement Done Right

Let’s look at how an effective accessible procurement process might work:

A university needed a new learning management system (LMS). They:

1. Included accessibility requirements in their RFP, specifying WCAG 2.1 AA compliance.
2. Required VPATs/ACRs from all vendors.
3. Conducted demonstrations with assistive technology users on the evaluation committee.
4. Compared VPATs and found that while none were perfect, one vendor had a detailed roadmap for addressing issues.
5. Included accessibility requirements in the contract, including remediation timeframes.
6. Implemented a monitoring plan to verify progress on accessibility issues.

The result: A successful implementation with minimal accessibility barriers and a vendor partnership focused on ongoing improvement.

Final Tips for Successful Accessible Procurement

1. Start early: Accessibility should be considered from the beginning, not as a last-minute checkbox.
2. Be specific: Don’t just ask for “508 compliance”—detail exactly what standards you expect.
3. Get it in writing: Include accessibility requirements in contracts with specific language.
4. Verify claims: Test products when possible rather than relying solely on vendor documentation.
5. Plan for gaps: No product is perfect—have a plan for addressing any accessibility issues.
6. Build relationships: Work with vendors who demonstrate commitment to improving accessibility.

Conclusion

Accessible procurement isn’t just about checking boxes—it’s about ensuring that the technology your organization purchases works for everyone. By understanding VPATs/ACRs, asking the right questions, and integrating accessibility into your existing processes, you can make informed decisions that reduce risk and support inclusion.

The 2024 DOJ Rule has raised the stakes for state and local governments, making accessible procurement not just a best practice but a legal requirement. Even when faced with challenging scenarios like missing VPATs or resistant vendors, there are practical approaches that can help you navigate the process successfully.

Remember that perfect accessibility is a journey, not a destination. The goal is to make informed choices that move your organization forward on the path to digital inclusion, while properly documenting decisions and mitigations when perfect solutions aren’t available.

As the digital landscape continues to evolve, procurement professionals who understand how to evaluate, document, and improve accessibility will be invaluable assets to their organizations—not just for compliance, but for creating truly inclusive digital environments.

Want to learn more about digital accessibility? Check out our other resources:

• Understanding WCAG Guidelines
• The Complete Guide to VPATs
• How to Build an Accessibility Program
• Understanding the 2024 DOJ Rule for ADA Title II Compliance

Need expert assistance with accessibility testing, remediation, or procurement? Contact Accessiblü today for a consultation.