Another prospective client meeting, another request for a VPAT – and this client already had an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) that they had completed on their own. However, the school that they attempting to win a contract with told them they would only consider an independently issued VPAT/ACR.
Note: An ACR is just a completed VPAT. The VPAT is standardized template we fill in.
We’ve talked about this trend and it’s quickly becoming the rule rather than the exception. The marketplace has quickly advanced and become more regimented in their requirements. Schools, colleges, universities, etc. are aware that they blanked by legal accessibility requirements from every direction:
- Section 504
- ADA Title II
- ADA Title III
And so now, whenever they’re procuring products and services, they’re going to insist that they meet a technical standard (WCAG 2.1 AA).
Let’s talk through a few big takeaways from the client meeting.
Ability to Fix Issues
What this client particularly liked is our process when it comes to VPATs: we offer a pause for them to remediate their digital asset before we issue the ACR.
So first we audit their digital asset (in this case, a web app) and then we give them the opportunity to fix the issues found in the audit so they can have a cleaner, if not fully WCAG 2.1 AA conformant, ACR.
This, in contrast with, you hire us to issue you a VPAT/ACR and we audit your digital asset and then deliver the ACR.
No, what we do is:
- Audit your digital asset
- Deliver the audit report
- Give your team the opportunity to make fixes
- Validate fixes
- Tell you what issues remain outstanding
- Validate latest fixes
We continue this process until the client reaches WCAG 2.1 AA conformance, has fixed all the issues they’re able to, and/or is satisfied.
WCAG 2.1 AA or 2.2 AA?
Most public entities are laser focused on WCAG 2.1 AA conformance, but it’s not that much more expensive to get a WCAG 2.2 AA audit while we’re here, so maybe 2.2 AA?
We recommended against 2.2 AA for a few reasons. First, it’s that many more potential accessibility issues to work through. Second, the client was already in a hurry and concerned with turnaround time (we told him 10 days for the completed audit). Third, again, 2.1 AA is the legal standard in almost all cases. Fourth, it still provides for an excellent level of accessibility.
Student or Instructor Persona?
Our client’s web app also supported dual roles: one experience for students and another for instructors.
We recommended checking with the school (they are the one potentially making the buying decision, after all), but said we could always just start with an ACR for the student persona since that would be the absolute essential persona for compliance.
This saves money and if the instructor persona is needed, we can always work on this next. No problem at all.
Next Steps
We left the client call by promising an email with:
- sample audit report
- sample ACR (redacted for client privacy, of course)
- proposal with initial price estimate
We also have a meeting set up so that the client can demo how to access the app for our auditor. This will enable us to fully scope and provide the client with a final quote.
If you need an independently issued VPAT for your digital asset, we’d love to help. Just send us a message and we’ll be right back with you.
