VPAT

VPAT stands for Voluntary Product Accessibility Template. It's a template developed by the Information Technology Industry Council to document how a product conforms to accessibility standards .

The key distinction most people miss: VPAT is the template. ACR is the completed report.

ACR stands for Accessibility Conformance Report. That's the general name for a document that outlines how accessible a product is based on testing and evaluation . When you use the VPAT template to create an ACR, you end up with an ACR in the VPAT format.

In practice, people use the terms interchangeably because the VPAT format has become the industry standard. Most customers ask for a "VPAT" because that's the terminology they're familiar with, even though what they're really getting is an ACR .

You could create an ACR in a different format, like a Google Doc or a web page. But the VPAT format provides a structured, easy-to-compare layout that makes it simple for buyers to evaluate multiple products side by side .

Why VPATs matter for procurement

The U.S. federal government must buy information and communication technology that is accessible per Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act . The government asks industry to submit an Accessibility Conformance Report so that the accessibility of a product may be evaluated. Without the ACR, the government may not proceed with the purchase unless there's a special use case exception that only the government can claim .

This isn't just federal. State governments, universities, and large corporations increasingly require VPATs as part of procurement. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, for example, requires vendors to provide a completed VPAT for their digital product or service upon request . The report must be based on the latest version of the template and measure conformance with WCAG 2.1 or WCAG 2.2 levels A and AA .

The Massachusetts procurement checklist is explicit: the VPAT must be no more than 12 months old, specific to the product version proposed for use, and completed by knowledgeable personnel with digital accessibility expertise .

The four VPAT editions

There are four different editions of the VPAT template . Which one you need depends on who your buyer is.

WCAG Edition: This evaluates against WCAG 2.1 AA or your specified version. It's most common for education and enterprise procurement .

Section 508 Edition: This is for U.S. federal contracts and agencies. It includes full evaluation against Revised Section 508 standards .

EU Edition: For European opportunities requiring EN 301 549 compliance documentation .

INT Edition: The combined international standards edition includes WCAG, Section 508, and EN 301 549 requirements for global procurement .

The best source of which edition you need is your target buyer. But if you're unsure, the INT Edition covers the most ground .

What's inside a VPAT

A completed VPAT includes several sections .

Introduction: Overview of the product, version, and responsible party.

Product Description: Functionality and features of the product or service.

Evaluation Methods: How testing was conducted. This should include assistive technologies like NVDA, JAWS, keyboard-only navigation, color contrast testing, and browser and operating system settings such as zoom and high contrast . If this field is left blank or only includes an automated scanning tool, that's a red flag .

Conformance Levels: Terms used to describe to what extent a product meets specific standards .

Tables for each standard: The VPAT includes tables listing all relevant success criteria from WCAG, Section 508, or EN 301 549. For each criterion, the report indicates conformance level and provides remarks.

Remarks and Explanations: For each criterion, this column provides additional information, including known limitations .

The four conformance levels

In the Conformance Level column, you enter terms to describe to what extent your product meets a specific standard . The terms are defined in the Essential Requirements for Authors section of the VPAT template .

Supports: The product is designed and developed with accessibility in mind and fully conforms with the relevant accessibility standards . It should work seamlessly for users relying on assistive technologies such as screen readers, voice recognition software, or alternative input devices . A product that fully supports Section 508 is generally a safe choice for organizations seeking to meet accessibility requirements .

Partially Supports: The vendor has made efforts to address accessibility concerns, but some aspects of the product may not meet the full accessibility requirements . This indicates the product does not fully conform to the standards . If your product partially supports a standard, you should provide a comment in the Remarks and Explanations column indicating how the standard is not fully met .

Does Not Support: The vendor has not incorporated accessibility features or has made minimal efforts to conform with accessibility standards . This can also be interpreted to mean the product does not conform to the standards . Purchasers should exercise caution when considering such products, especially for government or federally funded contexts where Section 508 conformance is mandatory .

Not Applicable: This means the particular requirement in question does not apply to the product's functionality or design . Common reasons might include the product not having certain features or functionalities relevant to that criterion . "Not applicable" should not be confused with non-conformance; it simply signifies that a specific aspect of the accessibility standard is not relevant to the product .

Not Evaluated: This indicates the vendor has not conducted an assessment or evaluation of the product's accessibility in relation to the particular standards in question . This could mean the vendor has not yet assessed the product for accessibility or has not included the evaluation results in the ACR . Purchasers should seek clarification from the vendor regarding their plans for accessibility evaluation .

How VPATs are created

Creating a VPAT requires an accessibility audit. You can't just guess at conformance levels.

The process typically involves :

Strategic consultation: Understanding procurement goals, which VPAT edition is needed, timeline, and desired conformance levels.

Scoping: Identifying the screens and flows that matter most for the ACR. Not everything needs to be in scope. A brief demo is usually enough to map out the audit strategy .

Technical audit: A formal, fully manual evaluation by a technical accessibility expert. This includes screen reader testing, keyboard testing, visual inspection, code inspection, and automated scan review . The Massachusetts procurement checklist specifies that evaluation methods must include both automated and manual testing, and testing must occur in the environments specified in their testing matrix .

Remediation window: Some vendors offer the opportunity to fix issues before the ACR is finalized. This results in a cleaner report .

Fix validation: After remediation, an expert validates each fix using the same meticulous evaluation from the audit .

ACR creation: Only after all possible improvements are made is the official ACR created. Every conformance level is backed by validated testing .

Costs and timeline

VPAT services vary in cost depending on scope and complexity.

Accessibility audits typically run $100 to $250 per page or screen . A WCAG Edition ACR costs around $350 plus audit cost. Section 508 Edition runs $550 plus audit cost. EU Edition is $650 plus audit cost. The INT Edition, covering all international standards, runs $950 plus audit cost .

Rush services for expedited deadlines add $250 to $750 .

The Massachusetts procurement checklist requires that a VPAT be no more than 12 months old at the time of submission . If the report date is more than a year old, that's a problem.

Who needs to provide a VPAT

If you're selling digital products to government agencies, you need to provide a VPAT. The U.S. federal government requires it. State governments like Massachusetts require it . Universities and large corporations increasingly require it.

If you're a vendor, you're responsible for completing an ACR for the product you developed . If your product is an add-on for an existing product from a separate company, you're still responsible for your own product's ACR .

The Microsoft Q&A thread about the Mermaid Add-in illustrates this. When a user asked how to obtain a VPAT for a third-party add-in for Microsoft Word and PowerPoint, the answer was straightforward: contact the vendor or developer of the add-in directly, as they are responsible for providing this documentation .

Real-world VPAT examples

The American Diabetes Association publishes its VPAT publicly. Their August 2025 report uses VPAT 2.5 and documents conformance with WCAG 2.2 AA for their professional publications platform .

The ADA's VPAT includes transparency about known limitations: inconsistent labeling, access to figures, and legacy content published before July 2025 that may not fully conform . This is exactly what a good VPAT should do—document both what works and what doesn't, with explanations.

Oracle's accessibility policy explains how they approach VPATs. They use various testing methods including automated tools, expert heuristic reviews, visual inspection, manual operation, and testing with users with disabilities using various assistive technologies . They report results using the VPAT template to provide Accessibility Conformance Reports .

Common mistakes in VPATs

The Massachusetts procurement checklist identifies several red flags .

Outdated reports: VPATs more than 12 months old raise concerns.

Wrong product version: The report must be specific to the product or version proposed for use.

Inadequate evaluation methods: If the Evaluation Methods Used field is left blank or only includes an automated scanning tool, that's a problem. Testing must include both automated and manual methods with specific assistive technologies.

No scope definition: The report must clearly identify the scope of testing—the specific pages, screens, functions, or tasks that were tested. If a product has both admin and end-user interfaces, the report should indicate which was tested.

Inconsistent terminology: Conformance level terms should be exactly "Supports," "Partially Supports," "Does Not Support," "Not Applicable," or "Not Evaluated." Using terms like "Pass" or "Fail" is incorrect.

Insufficient remarks: For any success criteria marked "Partially Supports" or "Does Not Support," detailed explanations must be provided, including the location of the violation. For criteria marked "Supports," examples or other remarks should justify the claim. If remarks fields are left blank or are insufficient, that's a problem.

What buyers look for

Government procurement teams use checklists like Massachusetts's to evaluate VPATs . They check whether the report was created by knowledgeable personnel with digital accessibility expertise, or by a reputable third-party firm .

They verify that the report measures conformance with WCAG 2.1 or 2.2 levels A and AA . AAA success criteria are not required.

They look for evidence that testing occurred with assistive technologies like NVDA, JAWS, keyboard-only navigation, color contrast testing, and browser and operating system settings such as zoom and high contrast .

They also consider whether the vendor provides an accessibility roadmap for known violations and may request demos of the product's accessibility and compatibility with assistive technology .

The bottom line

A VPAT is not optional if you want to sell to government, education, or enterprise buyers who require accessibility documentation. It's a competitive necessity.

The VPAT format provides a standardized way to communicate your product's accessibility conformance. When you complete the VPAT template, you create an Accessibility Conformance Report that buyers can evaluate against comparable products .

Even if your product doesn't fully meet all standards, completing a VPAT is beneficial. It shows customers that your company takes accessibility seriously . It allows your product to be evaluated against comparable products for accessibility. If you have a VPAT and a competitor's product doesn't, you will always be the most conformant with the standards .

Completing a VPAT also raises your awareness of your product's accessibility and allows you to take steps to make it more accessible, reaching a broader customer base .

The process requires a real accessibility audit, not guesswork. Manual testing with assistive technologies, clear documentation of what was tested, and honest conformance levels with detailed remarks are essential.

If you're responding to procurement requirements, make sure your VPAT is current, specific to the product version, created by someone with actual accessibility expertise, and backed by thorough testing documentation. That's what buyers are looking for.