What is the difference between a VPAT and an ACR?

The VPAT is the blank template, published by the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI). Once it has been filled in for a specific product, the document is called an Accessibility Conformance Report, or ACR.

Which VPAT edition should I use?

The 508 edition for US federal buyers, the EU edition for EN 301 549 and the European Accessibility Act, the WCAG edition when a buyer only asks about WCAG, and the INT (international) edition to cover all three in one document.

What are the conformance levels in a VPAT?

Supports, Partially Supports, Does Not Support, and Not Applicable. The WCAG tables also allow Not Evaluated, but only for level AAA criteria.

Can I write my own ACR?

Yes. Nothing requires a third party, and the template is free. But every row must be backed by real testing, and buyers increasingly ask who tested and how. An ACR that claims Supports without evidence is a legal and commercial risk.

Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) and VPAT, explained

A buyer — a government agency, a university, a large company — has asked for your VPAT or ACR before they will sign. Here is what that document is, which version they mean, and how to fill it in without over-claiming.

On this page

VPAT vs ACR
Who asks for one, and why
Which edition you need
The four conformance levels
How to fill one in
Mistakes buyers notice

VPAT vs ACR

The VPAT (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) is a blank template published free by the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI). Filled in for your product, it becomes an Accessibility Conformance Report. People use the two names interchangeably; when a buyer asks for "your VPAT" they mean your ACR.

It is a table: one row per accessibility requirement, a conformance level for each, and remarks explaining anything short of full support.

Who asks for one, and why

US federal agencies must buy accessible technology under Section 508, which since the 2017 refresh incorporates WCAG 2.0 level AA.
State governments and universities, many of which adopt 508 or WCAG in their procurement rules.
Buyers in the EU, where public procurement uses EN 301 549, and where the European Accessibility Act has applied to many products and services since 28 June 2025.
Large companies whose procurement checklists copied the public sector's.

Which edition you need

Edition	Covers	Use when
WCAG	WCAG 2.x A, AA, AAA	The buyer only mentions WCAG
508	WCAG plus Section 508 hardware, software and documentation rules	US federal and most US public buyers
EU	WCAG plus EN 301 549	European buyers
INT	All of the above	You sell in both markets and want one document

Download the current version from ITI's website rather than reusing an old copy; buyers do notice an outdated template.

The four conformance levels

Level	Means
Supports	The functionality meets the criterion without known defects, or meets it with an equivalent alternative.
Partially Supports	Some functionality does not meet the criterion. Say which.
Does Not Support	The majority of functionality does not meet it.
Not Applicable	The criterion does not apply — no video, so no captions. Say why.

The WCAG tables also allow Not Evaluated, but only for level AAA criteria.

How to fill one in

Test first. An ACR summarises an accessibility audit; it is not a substitute for one. Automated scans plus keyboard and screen-reader testing, against a sample of real templates and journeys.
Fill the product details: name and version, report date, a description, contact details, and the evaluation methods used — tools, assistive technology, who tested.
Go row by row. For each success criterion, pick a level and write remarks a buyer can understand: "Partially Supports — body text meets 4.5:1; the placeholder text in the search field is 2.5:1 and is being fixed in version 4.2."
Be specific about exceptions, and date the report. Update it with every significant release.

Mistakes buyers notice

"Supports" on everything. Almost no real product fully supports every AA criterion. A wall of Supports reads as untested.
Empty remarks. Partially Supports with no explanation gives the buyer nothing to evaluate.
No evaluation method. Increasingly, procurement teams ask who tested and how.
An old report. An ACR dated three versions ago describes a different product.

Evidence for the contrast rows. Three rows of every ACR are about contrast — 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.11. ContrastForge scans each page for those criteria and exports a dated list of every failure with the element, its ratio, the criterion and a passing colour, which is exactly what the remarks for those rows need. It covers contrast only; the rest of the report still needs the full audit.

See ContrastForge

More on this topic: Colour contrast checker · Color blindness simulator · Accessible color palette generator · WCAG contrast ratio: the 4.5:1, 3:1 and 7:1 rules explained