VPAT Requirements for Software Procurement
A VPAT, or Voluntary Product Accessibility Template, is a standardized document software vendors complete to disclose how their product conforms to accessibility standards. In procurement, buyers request a completed VPAT, called an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR), to evaluate whether a product meets the accessibility requirements of the purchasing organization. Federal agencies, state and local governments, universities, and large enterprises commonly require an ACR before signing a contract.
| Key Point | What It Means |
|---|---|
| VPAT vs ACR | The VPAT is the blank template. The ACR is the completed report a buyer reviews. |
| Common Editions | WCAG, Section 508, EN 301 549, and INT (international, combining all three). |
| Buyer Expectations | Accurate conformance levels, supporting evaluation methods, and current product scope. |
| Supporting Evaluation | An ACR is most credible when backed by a recent accessibility audit of the product. |
| Cost Range | ACR issuance starts at $300 and ranges to $1,000, separate from the underlying audit. |
Why Procurement Teams Request a VPAT
Public sector buyers often operate under accessibility obligations that flow into purchasing. Federal agencies follow Section 508. State and local governments under ADA Title II reference WCAG 2.1 AA. Universities frequently align procurement with both.
When these organizations buy software, they need documentation showing the product can meet the accessibility expectations placed on the buyer.
Private enterprises increasingly request VPAT requirements during procurement as well. Large buyers want to reduce downstream risk, support employees who use assistive technology, and avoid acquiring software that creates accessibility issues across their digital footprint.
What an ACR Should Include
A credible ACR identifies the product and version evaluated, the standards referenced (such as WCAG 2.1 AA or Section 508), the evaluation methods used, and a conformance table listing each success criterion with a status of Supports, Partially Supports, Does Not Support, or Not Applicable. Remarks and explanations accompany each criterion to describe how the product behaves.
Procurement reviewers look closely at the Partially Supports and Does Not Support entries. Vague or empty remarks are a signal that the underlying evaluation was thin. Specific, accurate remarks indicate the product was properly audited.
Choosing the Right VPAT Edition
The edition determines which standards the ACR addresses:
- WCAG edition: References WCAG 2.x success criteria. Most common for SaaS products sold to private buyers.
- Section 508 edition: Required for federal procurement in the United States.
- EN 301 549 edition: Used in European procurement contexts.
- INT edition: Combines WCAG, Section 508, and EN 301 549 for vendors selling globally.
Vendors selling across markets often produce the INT edition because a single document satisfies buyers across jurisdictions.
The Role of an Accessibility Audit
An ACR is only as accurate as the evaluation behind it. A scan alone cannot support an ACR because scans only flag approximately 25% of accessibility issues. The remaining 75% requires an evaluation that includes screen reader testing, keyboard testing, visual inspection, and code inspection.
Most accessibility audits start at $1,000 and range to $3,000, depending on product scope. The audit identifies the issues across WCAG success criteria, and the ACR documents the resulting conformance status. Buyers reviewing an ACR want to see that the evaluation methods listed are credible.
How Organizations Use ACRs to Reduce Risk
For buyers, requesting an ACR is part of a procurement process that filters out products likely to create accessibility problems after purchase. Organizations subject to ADA Title II requirements, Section 508, or the European Accessibility Act use ACRs as evidence that they considered accessibility before acquiring the product.
For vendors, maintaining a current ACR shortens sales cycles and removes a common procurement blocker. ACRs do not formally expire, but vendors typically refresh them after major product releases or changes to referenced standards. For more on what compliance entails, see our overview of ADA website compliance requirements.
What Strong VPAT Documentation Looks Like
The strongest ACRs share a few traits: they reference a specific product version, cite a recent audit as the evaluation method, use accurate conformance language for each criterion, and include remarks that describe actual product behavior. Weak ACRs use generic language, mark most criteria as Supports without explanation, or rely solely on automated checks.
Procurement teams reviewing dozens of ACRs learn quickly to spot the difference. A well-prepared ACR signals that the vendor takes accessibility seriously and reduces friction at the contract stage.