Purchasing accessible technology
Last updated:
This guide shares help and resources for considering digital accessibility during procurement and while seeking and evaluating potential vendors. This includesRequests for Proposals (RFP), Requests for Bid (RFB), Simplified Bids, Sole Source Justifications, and other waivers and contracts. It also describes support offered by the Center for User Experience.
Quick tips
1. Request for Proposal (RFP) and Request for Bid (RFB)
Share accessibility requirements with vendors and request information about their accessibility practices.
2. Accessibility documentation and feature demos
Ask vendors for demos of accessibility features and roadmaps for future development.
4. Contract language
Include information about our accessibility requirements in contracts with vendors.
5. Request an evaluation
Request accessibility evaluations from the Center for User Experience for finalists in major procurement efforts.
Request for Proposal (RFP) and Request for Bid (RFB)
This section outlines standardized accessibility requirements to include in RFPs and RFBs at UW–Madison. It also explains how accessibility subject matter experts can support evaluation and review processes for larger purchasing efforts.
Requirements language
Use the following language to incorporate accessibility into RFP/RFB requirements (note that the rating guidance applies to RFPs to assist the scoring team. The requirements are pass/fail for RFBs so adjust language to allow for a yes/no response.)
| ID | Requirement | Rating Guidance |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | The University of Wisconsin–Madison requires all digital products and services in use at the university to meet the technical accessibility standards set forth in the Web Accessibility Initiative Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, version 2.1, at conformance level AA (“WCAG 2.1, AA”). Please state your product’s WCAG conformance level and provide an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) or Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) to show its conformance. | Excellent The vendor attests to meeting WCAG 2.1 AA standards and provides documentation and reporting to back up those claims. Fair The vendor attests to some level of WCAG compliance and can provide documentation to back up those claims. Fail The vendor makes no claims to meet WCAG compliance or provides no evidence. |
| 2 | Describe how accessibility best practices are applied in your design, development, and functional accessibility testing during the quality assurance processes. Does your product require the use of an overlay or separate version to meet functional accessibility needs? | Excellent The vendor describes a comprehensive, in-house approach to accessibility, including design, development, and quality assurance performed by vendor staff. Fair The vendor describes accessibility processes that rely on contract or third party reviewers, often after product development. Fail The vendor provides no evidence of internal or external review. |
| 3 | Provide the most appropriate contact information for support and reporting should an end user encounter an accessibility barrier. | Excellent The vendor provides specific contacts for accessibility barrier reporting and support. Fair The vendor handles accessibility barrier reporting through a generic helpline or customer service contact. Fail The vendor provides no pathway for reporting or remediating barriers faced by customers. |
| 4 | Should the vendor provide a product demonstration, please include a demonstration of accessibility features and functional accessibility support. Additionally, please provide a sandbox environment for internal review by the Division of Information Technology. | Excellent The vendor provides a demo of accessibility features and functional accessibility, and provides access to a sandbox environment for internal review. Fair The vendor provides an accessibility feature demo or a sandbox environment. Fail The vendor does not provide a demo of accessibility features or access to sandbox environments. |
Involve a subject matter expert (SME)
You can request an accessibility SME from the Center for User Experience to support the evaluators in your RFP and RFB efforts. A SME can assist with:
- Finalist evaluations: Request that vendors provide a sandbox or test environment for the SME to conduct an internal accessibility evaluation of the product. Your accessibility SME can perform condensed pass/fail accessibility evaluations of up to 3 vendor finalists.
- Requirements scoring: Assessing each vendor’s requirements responses to provide scoring recommendations.
- Documentation review: Understanding the level of accessibility reported by a vendor in the documentation requested as part of the requirements.
Accessibility documentation and feature demos
Some vendors will have their accessibility documentation publicly available. Others may provide it upon request. Attempt to gather this information during your market review research stage of your procurement process. Appropriate documentation can include any of the following:
- Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT), sometimes known as an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR)
- Higher Education Community Vendor Assessment Toolkit (HECVAT)
- Other accessibility reports or documentation
When discussing demo sessions with vendors, request specific information about the accessibility of their product, such as the following:
- Whether their design, development, and quality assurance practices support accessibility
- Whether their products are tested with assistive technologies
- Who their primary contact is for accessibility questions and concerns
- Timelines for addressing accessibility complaints
- Demonstrations of accessibility features and keyboard navigation during their demos
Contract language
The Center for User Experience provides this accessibility contract language for inclusion in vendor contracts.
“For all products or services, the Vendor shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in a manner consistent with the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), version 2.1 (“WCAG 2.1”), at conformance levels A and AA. If the Product does not fully conform to WCAG 2.1 A and AA, the Vendor shall inform the University of non-conformance prior to the execution of this Agreement and shall provide a plan and timeline to achieve conformance. If during the Term of this Agreement, the Vendor fails to maintain compliance with WCAG 2.1 A and AA, or the University identifies an Accessibility Barrier in the Product that renders the Product inaccessible or unusable to people with disabilities, the University shall notify the Vendor of non-compliance. If conformance is not reached within 30 days of the Vendor receiving the notification of non-compliance (“Notice”), the Vendor and the University shall meet and mutually agree upon an appropriate timeline for resolution of the Accessibility Barrier(s). Should Vendor: (i) fail to acknowledge receipt of the notice within 30 days of receipt of the Notice, or (ii) fail to materially resolve the Accessibility Barrier(s) within the agreed-upon timeline, Vendor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless University from any claims arising out of its failure to comply with the aforesaid requirements. Failure to comply with these requirements shall constitute a material breach and may be grounds for termination of this Agreement by the University.”
Request an evaluation
Accessibility evaluations identify the barriers a user may encounter. This information is key to preparing the project team and university’s disability services offices to provide accommodations. All procurements with a student or public-facing audience, as well as procurements intended for all university employees or all employees within a school, college, or division, are required to receive a digital accessibility evaluation from the Center for User Experience (the Center) for their selected supplier.
For the Center to conduct an accessibility evaluation, the vendor must provide test instance access to the product. Once the vendor grants access, the evaluation can take approximately two to four weeks.
As part of the evaluation process, the Center creates an Accessibility Evaluation Report. This will be provided to the procurement initiator and to the ADA Coordinator at UW–Madison’s Office of Compliance. When applicable, this information will be used to complete the Assumption of Risk letter for leadership approval of non-compliant procurements.
For more information, please review our What to expect from digital accessibility evaluations page.
Get help from the
Center for User Experience (CUE)
We partner with you to create accessible, usable and inclusive digital spaces through free evaluations and consultations.