Review, Evaluate, and Verify the Information Received: Determining Next Steps

Review, Evaluate, and Verify the Information Received: Determining Next Steps

Once the accessibility information is received it is the requesting department/business unit's responsibility to evaluate the level of accessibility of the product/service under consideration and verify the information presented. When these steps are completed, it is the department/business unit's decision whether or not to place this product/service into the University's digital environment.

Additional help in reviewing an ACR can be found by contacting the UVA Digital Accessibility Coordinator and/or Learning Tech via email.

Below are key considerations for conducting a review of documentation, requesting a demonstration and understanding the accessibility of the product/service under consideration:

Review the Corporate Accessibility Accessibility Questionnaire:

  • Be certain all questions are answered.
  • If the point of contact for accessibility concerns is the sales representative or in a similar management position, be skeptical and ask for qualifications.
  • Are individuals with disabilities included in the testing and is a feedback processes incorporated in product development?
  • Does the supplier have an accessibility statement along with clear and reasonable practices to keep the product/service current with accessibility compliance requirements?

Review ACR and Product Roadmap:

  • A committee should be formed to review the vendor documentation and be present for the product demonstration. This committee should be comprised of subject matter experts (SMEs), representatives from the department/unit wishing to obtain the digital tool, and individuals with disabilities.
  • Assure that the ACR is current and for the version of the product/service under consideration.
  • Our preference is that the document be completed by a qualified, neutral third-party or a subject matter expert within the company, and the current ACR is available publicly. If it is completed by someone within the company, be skeptical. Ask for qualifications of the person/team/3rd party completing the document.
  • The goal of review is to identify which features of the product do and do not conform to accessibility standards. If the ACR states the product/service meets all WCAG or 508 criteria, be skeptical and make sure to schedule a demonstration of accessibility features.
  • There should be a clear explanation of the methodology used to complete the ACR. A variety of assistive technologies should be used.
  • For each area of noncompliance, there should be an explanation, examples of the situation, and guidance as to when it will be addressed/corrected.
  • Each component of the product/service should have its own ACR. For example, a mobile application should have separate ACR and be evaluated with iOS and Android operating systems. In addition there may be a desktop application that is needed for administration/management of the mobile application . This will require its own ACR.
  • A complete ACR report should cover all modules expected to be deployed in the UVA digital infrastructure.
  • Resources to help with VPAT (ACR) review:
  • Request a product roadmap highlighting the areas of accessibility standards nonconformance from the supplier. The roadmap should include an appropriate timeline for conformance and match the issues found on the ACR, clearly stating when each identified issue will conform to standards.

Preliminary Evaluation of the Product Under Consideration:

A basic evaluation of the product should be conducted to 1) assess the validity of the ACR, and 2) get a basic understanding where obvious accessibilities are.

Product Demonstration:

  • In order to evaluate the levels of accessibility standards conformance and the usability of a digital tool within our digital environment, it is important to have information on how the tool will be used. This information should be provided to the suppliers by the department/unit obtaining the tool so they can prepare for an appropriate demonstration. This will help us gain a broader understanding of the product's usability. Common use case scenarios shall be created by the department/business unit for the following (as applicable):
    • An administrator's perspective
    • A user's perspective
    • An instructor's perspective
    • The mobile/hand-held device experience
  • Request a demonstration from the supplier, making clear how a person with a disability would use the product/service following the use case scenarios created. It is preferred this demonstration be given by individuals who use assistive technologies (i.e., a screen reader, alternative input devices) in their daily life. They should be able to use these assistive technologies to complete the key processes required of this product/service.  Key elements of a basic demonstration include:
    • The unit/department obtaining the digital tool is responsible for mapping out user paths. Not all elements of tool may be considered for use within our environment. Common user paths include:
      • Desktop
        • Student User Path
        • Instructor User Path
        • Administrator User Path
      • Mobile
    • The vendor shall demonstrate each of these user paths using 1) a screen reader and 2) keyboard only access. It is preferable that the person giving the screen reader demonstration use a screen reader in their daily life and be well versed in its use.
    • The vendor shall also demonstrate the built-in accessibility features of the product.

It is not realistic to expect full accessibility standards conformance from any product. However, the supplier should understand which areas of the product are not in conformance, the ramifications of this non-conformance, and when the issue will be fixed.


When placing a product/service into the University's digital environment, responsibility for the accessibility of the asset lies with the department/unit obtaining the tool - not UVA Procurement Services, Learning Tech, SDAC, or the University's ADA Coordinator, although each department is available for consultation. The department/business unit is also responsible for creation of Equally Effective Alternate Access Plans (EEAAP) for the areas or components of the product/service that are identified as not accessible.

Because of this responsibility, it is important to engage with a supplier who understands the importance of providing an accessible product or service, understands their responsibility for producing a product or service with a high level of accessibility, is willing to be an active partner in achieving accessibility standards conformance, and also embraces the idea of inclusivity throughout their corporate culture.