The Accessibility Conformance Report your government deal is waiting on.
Flat $950. Five business days. A completed ITI VPAT® 2.5 with conservative ratings, full methodology disclosure, and a prioritized remediation plan — prepared by an AI-operated testing practice with a human accountable for every report.
Your procurement contact asked for a VPAT or ACR. You don't need a six-week consulting engagement — you need an honest, well-documented conformance report that a reviewer can actually trust.
AI-operated testing, openly disclosed. Human-accountable. No compliance theater.
Built for software vendors who sell to government, education, and enterprise — the teams whose deal is stalled on a missing ACR, whose RFP response is due, or whose annual VPAT refresh is overdue.
Straight pricing. No scoping calls.
VPAT® / ACR preparation
$950 flat
- Full WCAG 2.1 AA test pass of your product
- Completed ITI VPAT 2.5 (Section 508 or INT edition — your choice)
- Conservative ratings — we don't inflate "Supports"
- Methodology disclosure written into the report notes
- Prioritized remediation appendix — what to fix first, and why
- 5 business days from access to delivery
After payment, our intake questionnaire arrives by email within a few hours — the 5-day clock starts when access works. Prefer to talk first? [email protected]
Add-ons & variants
| Complex multi-role applications | $1,500 — buy |
|---|---|
| Annual refresh of an ACR we prepared | $450/yr — buy |
| Product suite — 3 ACRs | $2,400 — buy |
Not selling to government?
| WCAG 2.2 AA audit (findings + remediation plan) | $950 — buy |
|---|---|
| Single-flow audit (one critical user journey) | $350 — buy |
| Ongoing monitoring | $99–149/mo — email us |
How it works — five business days, start to finish
- Day 0 — Kickoff. You give us access: URLs, test credentials, and the product edition/version to be reported on. We confirm scope in writing the same day.
- Days 1–2 — Testing. The full test pass: automated scanning across your pages and states, plus AI-operated interactive testing — keyboard-only navigation, focus management, form and error-handling flows, reflow and zoom behavior, name/role/value inspection of custom widgets.
- Day 3 — Ratings. Every WCAG 2.1 AA criterion gets a rating with remarks. Where our evidence can't prove full support, we rate Partially Supports and say exactly why. We'd rather under-claim than have a reviewer catch an inflated rating.
- Day 4 — Drafting. We complete the ITI VPAT 2.5 in your chosen edition, write the methodology notes, and build the remediation appendix ordered by user impact and fix effort.
- Day 5 — Delivery. You receive the finished ACR plus the appendix. One round of clarifying questions is included — if we misread a feature, we'll correct and re-issue.
We publish exactly what we test, how we test it, and what we can't test.
Most ACRs are black boxes. A reviewer sees a wall of "Supports" ratings and no way to know what was actually checked. That's why procurement teams have learned to distrust vendor VPATs — and why an honest one stands out.
Every ACR Ready report discloses, in the report itself:
- The exact methodology. Which tools ran, which flows were exercised, which pages and states were in scope, and the date of testing. A reviewer can reconstruct what we did.
- AI-operated testing, stated plainly. Our testing is conducted by AI systems operating browsers and analysis tools, with a named human accountable for the final report. We say this in the ACR notes because your procurement reviewer deserves to know how the evidence was produced — and because hiding it would undermine everything else in the report.
- Conservative ratings by policy. When automated and AI-operated evidence cannot demonstrate full support for a criterion, we rate it Partially Supports with specific remarks — never "Supports" on benefit of the doubt.
- What we don't do. We do not perform human assistive-technology testing (JAWS, NVDA, VoiceOver). The report says so explicitly, and we recommend supplementing with AT user testing where your risk profile warrants it.
This is the same transparency your procurement reviewer wants to see. An ACR that shows its work is more useful in a deal than one that claims perfection — because the reviewer can verify it, and because your engineering team can act on it.
See before you buy.
A complete sample ACR — real format, real methodology notes, real conservative ratings on a demo application — is available on request. If your procurement contact wants to preview what they'd receive, send them our way.
Frequently asked questions
Is this a certification? Does it make us "compliant"?
No — and be wary of anyone who says otherwise. There is no official WCAG or Section 508 "certification," and an ACR is not a legal compliance determination. An ACR is a structured, evidence-based conformance report: it documents how your product performed against WCAG 2.1 AA criteria at a point in time, using a disclosed methodology. Procurement teams request it precisely because it's a disclosure document, not a rubber stamp.
Do you test with screen readers?
Honestly: no. We do not perform human assistive-technology testing with JAWS, NVDA, or VoiceOver. We test the things that determine whether assistive technology can work — keyboard operability, accessible names, roles, states, focus order, semantic structure — using automated and AI-operated methods, and we state this limitation in the report itself. Where our evidence can't prove full AT support, the rating is Partially Supports, not Supports. If your risk profile calls for human AT testing, we'll say so and you can layer it on top of our report.
How is the testing actually done?
By AI systems operating real browsers — running automated scans, driving keyboard-only flows, inspecting the accessibility tree, and testing zoom/reflow behavior — with a human accountable for reviewing and standing behind every delivered report. This is disclosed in the ACR notes, not buried in fine print.
Which VPAT edition do I get?
The current ITI VPAT 2.5, in the Section 508 edition (for U.S. government sales) or the INT edition (508 + EN 301 549 + WCAG, for international buyers). Tell us who's asking for the report and we'll recommend one.
What do you need from us?
Working URLs, test credentials for each relevant role, the product name/version for the report cover, and a contact for scope questions. That's it. No install calls, no discovery workshops. The 5-day clock starts when access works.
What if the report finds problems?
It almost certainly will — nearly every product has gaps at WCAG 2.1 AA. That's what the remediation appendix is for: findings ordered by user impact, mapped to criteria, with fix guidance. Many buyers accept a candid Partially Supports with a remediation plan far more readily than a suspicious wall of Supports.
How does the annual refresh work?
$450/yr for products we've already reported on. We re-run the full pass, update ratings and remarks, and issue a freshly dated ACR — because a stale VPAT reads as no VPAT to a careful reviewer.
Can you advise us on our legal exposure or ADA/508 obligations?
No. We prepare conformance documentation; we are not a law firm and nothing we deliver is legal advice. For questions about legal obligations or risk, talk to counsel — we're happy to hand them our methodology so they know exactly what the report does and doesn't establish.