Accessibility questions in RFPs used to be rare. Now they show up in almost every enterprise vendor evaluation, and how you respond directly affects whether you advance.
What You’ll Typically See
Accessibility questions in enterprise RFPs generally fall into a few categories:
- “Provide your current VPAT/ACR.”
- “Describe your product’s conformance with WCAG 2.1 AA.”
- “What is your accessibility testing methodology?”
- “Describe your accessibility roadmap and remediation process.”
- “Do you have a dedicated accessibility team or use a third-party evaluator?”
The underlying question is always the same: can we trust that this product won’t create accessibility liability for us?
Responding When You Have an ACR
If you already have a current, third-party evaluated ACR, this is straightforward: attach it. A few things that strengthen your response:
- Note when the evaluation was performed and which product version it covers.
- Mention the evaluator’s credentials ( DHS Trusted Tester and IAAP certifications signal demonstrated expertise).
- If your ACR was independently verified, say so. It distinguishes your report from self-assessments.
- Include a brief note about your maintenance plan (how often you re-evaluate).
Responding When You Don’t Have One
The worst response is silence or a vague statement like “we are committed to accessibility.” Procurement teams see through that immediately.
A stronger response acknowledges the gap and shows a concrete plan:
- State that a third-party evaluation is in progress (or scheduled) with an expected completion date.
- Describe what you’ve done so far (automated scanning, internal testing, known remediations).
- Commit to delivering the completed ACR by a specific date.
Many procurement processes have evaluation periods of 30–90 days. If you can deliver a credible ACR within that window, you’re still in the running.
Turning It Into a Differentiator
Most of your competitors either don’t have an ACR or have a weak one (automated-only, self-assessed, outdated). A properly evaluated, independently verified report with specific remarks and recent dates puts you ahead of the field. It signals:
- You treated the requirement as real work.
- Your product has been evaluated by someone with actual expertise.
- You re-evaluate it when the product changes.
Common Mistakes
| Mistake | Why It Hurts |
|---|---|
| Submitting an automated-only report | Reviewers know automated tools catch less than half of issues. It signals you didn’t invest in a real evaluation. |
| Submitting an outdated ACR | If it’s more than 18 months old or covers a previous product version, it raises more questions than it answers. |
| Vague commitment language | “We are committed to accessibility” without evidence is a non-answer. Procurement teams score on specifics. |
| Ignoring the question | Leaving it blank or responding “N/A” can be an automatic disqualification depending on how the RFP is scored. |