A VPAT (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) is a standardized document that reports how well a product conforms to accessibility standards like WCAG and Section 508. When you fill one out, the finished document is called an ACR – an Accessibility Conformance Report. Buyers, especially government agencies, universities, and large enterprises, request VPATs during procurement so they can compare the accessibility of competing products before signing a contract.
If you’re reading this, odds are a deal is sitting in your pipeline waiting on one. That’s how most vendors first encounter the VPAT: not through an accessibility initiative, but through a procurement email with a deadline.
Where the VPAT comes from
The template is published by the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), and the current version is VPAT 2.5. It comes in four editions, and picking the right one matters:
- WCAG edition – reports against WCAG only. The most common ask from commercial buyers.
- Section 508 edition – for selling to US federal agencies, which are legally required to buy accessible technology.
- EU edition – reports against EN 301 549, the European standard. Increasingly relevant now that the European Accessibility Act is in effect.
- INT edition – covers all three. The safe choice if you sell internationally.
Inside, the document walks through each accessibility criterion and asks you to rate your product as Supports, Partially Supports, Does Not Support, or Not Applicable – with remarks explaining each rating.
The part vendors get wrong
The “V” stands for Voluntary, and some vendors treat the whole exercise that way: an intern fills in “Supports” down the column, someone slaps a logo on it, and off it goes to procurement.
That’s a mistake, and not just an ethical one. A VPAT is a written conformance claim. If a buyer relies on it and your product turns out to be inaccessible, that document becomes evidence against you – in a contract dispute or an ADA claim. The FTC’s $1 million fine against accessiBe in 2025 made it clear that overstated accessibility claims carry real consequences.
A credible VPAT is backed by actual testing. Not an automated scan – automated tools catch roughly a third of WCAG failures – but manual testing with a keyboard and a screen reader by someone who knows what the criteria mean. Honest “Partially Supports” ratings with specific remarks are more persuasive to procurement reviewers than a suspicious wall of “Supports.” Reviewers read a lot of these. They know what padding looks like.
What a VPAT costs
At Labrador Services, VPAT/ACR documentation runs $750–$1,500 on top of an audit, depending on the edition. The audit is the real work – the VPAT is the structured write-up of what the testing found. Industry-wide, standalone VPAT engagements typically land between $1,500 and $6,000 because the vendor has to do the underlying testing anyway.
If someone offers you a VPAT for $200 with no testing behind it, you’re paying for a liability, not a document.
Frequently asked questions
Is a VPAT legally required?
No. It’s voluntary. But if you sell to US federal agencies, Section 508 requires them to buy accessible technology, and a VPAT is the standard way to demonstrate it. In practice, no VPAT often means no deal.
How long is a VPAT valid?
There’s no official expiration, but buyers expect one that reflects your current product. Re-issue after major releases, or roughly annually.
Can I write my own VPAT?
Yes – the template is free from ITI. The risk isn’t the paperwork, it’s the testing behind it. If your team can competently test against WCAG 2.2 AA, you can self-author. Most teams can’t, which is why third-party ACRs carry more weight in procurement.
What’s the difference between a VPAT and an ACR?
The VPAT is the blank template. The ACR is the completed report. People use “VPAT” for both, and everyone will know what you mean.