A11yJam Roundtable Report: Working With Vendors
Procurement is a key component of successful government service delivery. During this session, Waldo Jaquith of U.S. Digital Response led a discussion on how government teams can work with vendors to improve the accessibility of their software and its outputs. Attendees learned about how to include accessibility requirements in solicitations and strategies to move beyond vendors’ claims.
Working With Vendors
On April 15, 2026, the Beeck Center hosted Accessibility Jam, which featured four interactive roundtable discussions. This is an anonymized report out of the discussion, showcasing key insights, questions, and topics.
Show & Tell Demo Video
Key Roundtable Insights
- “Accessibility” is used as a word, not a standard
- Both vendors and government buyers use the term without agreeing on what it means. Vague claims like “508 compliant” obscure which WCAG version and conformance level (A, AA, AAA) is actually being met, and the people who rely on that accessibility are typically left out of the conversation entirely.
- Vendor accessibility claims don’t always hold up when tested
- After being paid to complete an audit, vendors have disclosed that remediation would take many years – longer than the contract term itself.
- Contract language is the real leverage point.
- Explicitly specifying a WCAG version, requiring a completed Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) rather than a generic Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT), building quality surveillance into custom contracts, and scoping out all potential deliverables all help hold vendors accountable. A thoughtful ACR can signal a vendor’s accessibility maturity before you sign.
- Vendor size and market leverage shape how much pushback actually works
- Often smaller vendors are more responsive to accessibility pushback, while larger vendors deflect. Going through resellers or cooperative purchasing vehicles can create leverage that a single small agency doesn’t have on its own.
Roundtable Questions & Summary Answers
Does anyone have any particularly bad experiences with vendors and accessibility?
- Some vendors have tried to substitute their own limited internal rule set for recognized accessibility standards.
- After being paid to complete an audit, one vendor admitted that full remediation would take years longer than the contract term itself.
- Some vendors have declined to respond to accessibility documentation requests on smaller accounts, treating accessibility support as tied to how much a contract is worth.
- On the positive side, some vendors have provided an ACR and a remediation plan with a timeline. This includes ACRs with detailed descriptions of testing methods and meaningful comments supporting each ranking, with links to known defect tickets, reissued with each new release.
Resources & Examples
Massachusetts Procurement of Accessible Digital Products and Services
Guidance and practical resources for incorporating digital accessibility requirements throughout the procurement of digital products and services.
The UK Technology Code of Practice
The Technology Code of Practice is a set of government guidelines for designing, building, and buying digital services and technology to ensure they are efficient, accessible, and cost-effective in the UK.
What are your experiences with working with vendors?
- Smaller companies tend to be more responsive. Larger ones are more likely to push back, arguing a defect is really just “an enhancement request.”
Resources & Examples
Massachusetts Vendor Digital Accessibility Testing Obligations
Guidance outlining digital accessibility testing requirements for vendors delivering digital products and services
AI-Powered Procurement: Harnessing AI’s Potential for More Efficient State Procurement Practices
Public procurement in state governments can be slow and inefficient, but artificial intelligence (AI) offers a solution by automating tasks, improving decision-making, and addressing workforce gaps, as highlighted in a joint brief by NASCIO and NASPO.
What accessibility requirement do you wish you had been written into a contract?
- Requiring a live demo with a native screen reader user, rather than accepting a written claim of compliance.
- Specifying the exact WCAG version and conformance level (e.g., 2.2 AA) instead of a vague “508 compliant” claim.
- Requiring a dedicated ACR rather than just a completed VPAT template, since a VPAT can technically be filled out without a real ACR behind it.
- Extending accessibility requirements to all deliverables under the scope of work, including documents, slide decks, and reports, not just code or web pages. Then applying that requirement to any additional scopes added later.
- Building in a quality surveillance plan that specifies what automated and manual testing will be used, how often, and what happens if the vendor fails to meet the standard.
Resources & Examples
Contracting for Transformation Toolkit
Tangible tools, scoring guides and strategies to embed equity and wellbeing into your procurement process. Designed for human services with opportunities to apply these principles to other fields.
Defining a Roadmap for Procurement Transformation in Syracuse
Post from the Syracuse Procurement Team discussing their work in transforming procurement in Syracuse, NY.
What vendor behavior signals strong accessibility values or approaches?
- Being responsive and willing to engage as a partner rather than getting defensive.
- Submitting a complete, detailed ACR, rather than one marked “in progress” across every criterion.
- Pairing an ACR with a concrete remediation plan and timeline. Most governments give vendors about a week to propose one.
- Having an internal digital accessibility policy and a staff member specifically responsible for accessibility oversight.
