Category: Compliance and Reporting

Voluntary Product Accessibility Template

Also known as: VPAT, VPAT, Accessibility Conformance Report template

Simply put

A Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) is a standardized document that a product's developer or vendor uses to describe how well their digital product or service meets accessibility standards. Organizations often request a VPAT during purchasing to understand a product's accessibility before buying it. The completed document helps buyers compare products, though it does not by itself guarantee that a product is fully accessible or legally compliant.

Formal definition

The VPAT is a template developed by the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) that vendors use to produce an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) documenting how a product or service conforms to applicable accessibility criteria, such as WCAG success criteria. It breaks down criteria and standards for testing and records a self-reported conformance assessment, typically prepared by the product developer or vendor. Because a VPAT is generally vendor-authored and reflects the author's own testing and stated conformance, its reliability depends on the rigor of the underlying evaluation; it should be treated as a procurement disclosure document rather than independent certification or proof of legal compliance, and manual and assistive technology testing may be needed to validate its claims.

Why it matters

A VPAT gives buyers a structured way to evaluate the accessibility of digital products before purchase, which is especially important for organizations that must account for accessibility in procurement decisions. Rather than relying on informal vendor assurances, a completed Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) built from the VPAT template lets purchasers see how a product is claimed to conform to specific criteria, such as individual WCAG success criteria, and compare competing products on a more consistent basis.

The document also matters because it shifts some accessibility accountability toward vendors. When a VPAT is requested during procurement, it prompts developers to assess and document their own conformance against recognized standards. This can surface gaps early and inform contract terms, remediation timelines, and risk decisions. Public sector and higher education buyers, in particular, commonly request VPATs as part of their purchasing requirements.

However, a VPAT should not be mistaken for independent certification or proof of legal compliance. Because it is generally vendor-authored and reflects the author's own testing and stated conformance, its reliability depends on the rigor of the underlying evaluation. A favorable VPAT does not by itself guarantee that a product is fully accessible or that using it eliminates legal risk, and buyers may need manual and assistive technology testing to validate the claims. This entry is general information, not legal advice.

Who it's relevant to

Procurement and purchasing teams

Buyers use VPATs and the resulting ACRs to evaluate and compare the accessibility of digital products before purchase. They should treat these as vendor self-disclosures, request current and complete reports, and consider independent validation rather than relying on the document alone.

Product developers and vendors

Developers and vendors are the typical authors of a VPAT. Completing an ACR requires assessing the product against applicable criteria and documenting conformance honestly, since the value of the report depends on the rigor of the underlying testing.

Accessibility engineers and QA testers

Those responsible for evaluating conformance perform the testing that a VPAT documents. Because self-reported conformance can be incomplete, manual and assistive technology testing are often needed to substantiate or verify the claims recorded in the report.

Public sector and higher education buyers

Government agencies and educational institutions commonly request VPATs as part of their IT purchasing requirements. These buyers rely on the standardized format to support accessibility-conscious procurement, but should confirm which standards and criteria apply to their context.

Legal counsel and compliance officers

Counsel and compliance staff may reference VPATs when assessing accessibility-related risk in procurement. They should note that a VPAT is not certification or proof of legal compliance and consult current agency guidance and qualified legal advice for specific obligations.

Inside VPAT

Product and Version Information

Identifies the specific product, version, and release being evaluated, along with the date of the report, so that readers can determine which iteration of the product the accessibility claims apply to.

Applicable Standards/Guidelines

Names the accessibility standards against which the product is evaluated. The Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) publishes editions of the VPAT template aligned to specific standards, commonly including WCAG (such as 2.0, 2.1, or 2.2 at Level A and AA), Revised Section 508, and the EN 301 549 European standard, with an International edition combining these.

Conformance Level Terminology

Uses defined terms to describe how the product meets each criterion, such as 'Supports', 'Partially Supports', 'Does Not Support', and 'Not Applicable'. These qualitative labels indicate the degree to which a given success criterion is satisfied.

Success Criteria Tables

Presents each applicable success criterion alongside the conformance level and explanatory remarks. The remarks column is intended to describe how the product meets the criterion or to explain gaps and limitations.

Remarks and Explanations

Provides narrative detail supporting each conformance claim, which is where meaningful evaluation context appears rather than in the label alone.

Accompanying Conformance Report (ACR)

When a VPAT template is completed and filled in with a product's evaluation results, the resulting document is often referred to as an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR). The VPAT is the template; the ACR is the completed deliverable.

Common questions

Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about VPAT.

Does a completed VPAT mean a product is fully accessible or legally compliant?

No. A VPAT is a self-disclosure document that reports how a product measures against a chosen standard; it does not, by itself, guarantee that the product is accessible to all users or that it satisfies legal obligations. Conformance claims in a VPAT reflect the vendor's own evaluation, which may be incomplete or optimistic. Meeting WCAG success criteria does not ensure a usable experience for every user, and it does not confer immunity from legal claims. A VPAT should be treated as one input into a broader accessibility and procurement assessment, not as proof of compliance.

Is a VPAT a government-issued certification or an official regulatory requirement?

No. The VPAT is a reporting template originally developed by the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), not a government certification or seal of approval. Completing one does not represent endorsement by any agency. While federal procurement contexts commonly request accessibility conformance information consistent with applicable requirements, the VPAT itself is a voluntary format for presenting that information rather than a mandated legal instrument. This is general information and not legal advice; consult qualified counsel regarding specific procurement or regulatory obligations.

Which VPAT edition should we use for our product?

VPAT is published in several editions aligned to different standards, commonly including a WCAG edition, a Section 508 edition, an EN 301 549 (European) edition, and an international edition that combines multiple standards. The appropriate choice generally depends on the markets and buyers you are addressing. A product sold to US federal agencies is often evaluated against Section 508 expectations, while other contexts may call for WCAG or EN 301 549. Selecting the edition that matches your intended audience helps ensure the report is relevant to the requirements those buyers must meet.

How should conformance levels be documented within a VPAT?

Each applicable criterion is typically reported using a conformance level such as 'Supports', 'Partially Supports', 'Does Not Support', or 'Not Applicable', accompanied by remarks and explanations. The remarks column is important, as it describes how a criterion is met, where gaps exist, and any known limitations. Vague or empty remarks reduce the document's usefulness. When reporting against WCAG, be precise about the version and level evaluated, since success criteria differ across WCAG 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2, and AA is the level most commonly cited as a target.

What testing should support the claims made in a VPAT?

Claims are generally more defensible when supported by a combination of testing methods. Automated tools detect only a portion of potential issues, so manual review and testing with assistive technologies such as screen readers, keyboard-only navigation, and magnification are typically needed to substantiate conformance statements. Documenting the methods, tools, and assistive technologies used, as well as the scope of what was and was not tested, helps buyers understand the basis and limitations of the reported results.

How often should a VPAT be updated?

A VPAT reflects a product at a specific point in time, so it can become outdated as the product changes. It is generally advisable to review and update the document after significant releases or feature changes that could affect accessibility, and to note the date and product version the report describes. An accurate, current version and date help buyers assess whether the report still applies to the version they are evaluating. Because requirements and referenced standards also evolve, periodic reassessment against the applicable standard is prudent.

Common misconceptions

A VPAT proves a product is accessible or legally compliant.

A VPAT is a self-reported documentation format describing how a product measures against accessibility standards; it is not a certification, an audit, or a guarantee of legal compliance. Its accuracy depends on the rigor and honesty of whoever completes it, and completing one does not by itself confer immunity from legal claims. Readers should treat it as a vendor's disclosure, not as independent verification, and consult qualified legal counsel regarding compliance obligations.

A VPAT is an official government form required by law.

The VPAT is a template published by the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), not a statute or regulation. While VPATs and the resulting Accessibility Conformance Reports are commonly requested in procurement, particularly in federal contexts referencing Section 508, the template itself is an industry tool rather than a legal mandate. Specific procurement requirements come from the applicable authority, not from the template.

A 'Supports' rating means every user will have an accessible experience.

Conformance labels reflect an evaluation against specific success criteria and do not guarantee usability for all users or all assistive technologies. Meeting success criteria on paper does not ensure an accessible experience in practice, and the quality of a VPAT depends on whether manual and assistive technology testing informed the claims rather than automated checks alone.

Best practices

Confirm the VPAT edition and standards version being used (for example, the WCAG version and level or the Section 508 edition) so you know exactly what the conformance claims are measured against.

Read the remarks and explanations columns closely rather than relying on the summary labels, since 'Partially Supports' and 'Supports' claims are only meaningful when the narrative describes how and where the product meets or falls short of each criterion.

Verify that the report covers the specific product version you are evaluating and check its date, because accessibility can change between releases.

Do not treat a VPAT or completed Accessibility Conformance Report as a substitute for your own testing; supplement it with manual and assistive technology testing, as documentation alone does not confirm real-world accessibility.

Ask the vendor how the evaluation was conducted, including whether manual testing and assistive technology were used, since claims based only on automated checks capture a limited portion of potential issues.

When using a VPAT to support procurement or compliance decisions, involve accessibility and legal expertise, and recognize that the document informs but does not determine your obligations under the applicable authority.