Accessible Digital Resource Procurement and Development

If a digital resource is used for university business, it must be accessible. This protects the university and ensures access to everyone:

• If you are working, you should be able to continue working whether you have or acquire a disability.
• If you are learning, you should be able to continue learning whether you have or acquire a disability.

The provider must supply accessibility documentation so we can assess compliance. The goal of market research is to identify digital resources that meet university needs and comply with accessibility regulations.

• Accessibility documentation: Some providers already have documentation. Others may need time to complete it. Rushed responses can lead to inaccurate information, which puts the university at risk. Even with documentation, we may find the digital resource is not accessible. Because we cannot fix third-party products ourselves, we must ask providers to improve their digital resources and share any plans or timelines for remediation.
• Contracts: Contracts must include accessibility clauses to protect our community. Some providers may take months to negotiate. The Office of General Counsel negotiates on behalf of the university, depending on the cost of the digital resource. They need time to ensure TAMU-CC is protected.

We can provide an introductory message to providers about accessibility documentation.

Submit the intake form through the Service Portal. The person completing the form should know details about the provider and the digital resource, including:

• What the digital resource does
• How it is hosted (cloud, local server, installed software, hardware, or a combination)
• Who IT can contact for support
• Cost to TAMU-CC or to students required to purchase it
• Who and how many people will use it
• What support is needed for renewal, updates, or implementation
• Whether confidential information will be stored, transferred, or processed
• What market research was conducted to justify the acquisition

If the digital resource is inaccessible, the intake form responses can be used to complete the accessibility exception form.

Each area within the department of IT reviews the submission. Additional areas may review relevant digital resources (e.g., DLAI reviews instructional or educational technologies). The Digital Accessibility Officer reviews any accessibility documentation provided.

• If no documentation is provided, the digital resource is automatically considered non-compliant.
• Providing documentation does not guarantee compliance.

Accessibility Review Outcomes:

• Compliant
  • Occurrence: Rare
  • Next steps: Proceed with acquisition
  • Cautions: Confirm provider will support accommodation requests. Some features may still be inaccessible.
• Non-Compliant
  • Occurrence: Very common
  • Next steps: Request remediation plans or timelines from the provider. If the liability risk is lower than the business impact, submit an exception form with justification and market research.
  • Cautions: Exception may not be approved. Approval does not protect the university from future liability.
• Exempt or Holds an Exception
  • Occurrence: Occasional
  • Next steps: Proceed with acquisition
  • Cautions: Exemptions and exceptions may change. Providers cannot declare themselves exempt. Only federal and state governments can grant exemptions.

Executive leadership will review:

• Accommodations or workarounds available if the digital resource is inaccessible
• Ways TAMU-CC or the provider can improve accessibility
• Market research that shows due diligence

If the digital resource is rejected:

• The request will end, or
• The client must transition to an approved alternative

If the digital resource is approved:

• The client may acquire it for the duration of the exception
• The client must review other options before the exception expires

The main goal is to educate providers about our regulatory requirements. These requirements will become stricter in 2026. We want providers to be informed and prepared.

Each university is responsible for ensuring that all digital resources used in their programs, services, and activities are accessible to people with disabilities. This includes digital resources created by third-party providers.

Many third-party providers have different levels of experience with accessibility compliance. While there are tens of millions of web and software developers worldwide, there are fewer than ten thousand certified accessibility professionals. This means there is a wide gap in expertise, and even commonly used digital resources may not meet accessibility standards.

Although digital accessibility laws have been in place for more than twenty years, many providers still offer inaccessible digital resources. Not all providers are familiar with global, federal, or state laws on accessibility laws. This includes large corporations as well as small businesses. Anyone can create digital resources that are not accessible.

The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) view inaccessible digital resources as a barrier to equitable access for people with disabilities. They have emphasized this in recent regulatory updates and official communications to public entities and federal agencies.

They have stated that voluntary action has not led to an increase in accessible digital resources. Each of us needs to take more proactive action. Some key notices include:

• M-23-22: Delivering a Digital-First Public Experience [PDF]: This memo provides guidance to federal agencies on designing and delivering accessible websites and digital services.
• M-24-08: Strengthening Digital Accessibility and the Management of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act [PDF]: This memo outlines how agencies should maintain accessible technology environments and promote accessible digital experiences in accordance with US Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
• May 19, 2023 - Dear Colleague Letter on Online Accessibility at Postsecondary Institutions: The Department of Justice and the Office for Civil Rights reminded colleges and universities to ensure that their online services, programs, and activities are accessible to people with disabilities.
• April 24, 2026 - New Rulemaking for Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): The US DOJ explained that relying on voluntary best practices has not led to widespread accessibility. The new rule establishes clear and consistent requirements for public entities to make their web content and mobile applications accessible.
  1. Paragraph 692: "As history has demonstrated, requiring entities to comply with their nondiscrimination obligations without setting clear and predictable standards for when content must be made accessible has not resulted in widespread web and mobile app accessibility. The Department therefore believes it is critical to establish clear and consistent requirements for public entities to follow in making their web content and mobile apps accessible."
  2. Paragraph 928: "With subpart H, the Department is ensuring that people with disabilities generally will not have to request access to public entities' web content and content in mobile apps, nor will they typically need to wait to obtain that access. Given the Department's longstanding position on the accessibility of online content, discussed in section III.B and C of the preamble to the final rule, public entities should already be on notice of their obligations. If they are not, the final rule unquestionably puts them on notice."

Accessibility reviews are required for all digital resources used for university business, regardless of whether anyone currently using the resource has a known disability.

Employees are protected from job discrimination based on disability. They are not required to disclose their medical conditions. While some employees may choose to share this information with their supervisor or the Human Resources office to request accommodations, others may choose not to disclose due to fear of discrimination. This means you may be working with people who have disabilities that have not been disclosed.

Our TAMU-CC community is diverse. Because disclosure is not required, and because anyone can acquire a disability at any time, we must assume that our community includes people with disabilities. This includes students, faculty, staff, and visitors.

For this reason, all digital resources must be reviewed for compliance with accessibility requirements. This ensures that everyone has equitable access to participate fully in university programs, services, and activities.

While Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) focuses on public access to services, programs, and activities, it is not the only regulation that applies to digital accessibility. Employees are protected under other laws, including US Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act Title I, which prohibit discrimination based on disability in the workplace.

These laws matter whether an employee has a disability today or acquires a disability tomorrow. Employee rights will not be waived.

Employees are not required to disclose their medical conditions. Some may choose to share this information with their supervisor or the Human Resources office to request accommodations, but others may choose not to disclose due to fear of discrimination. This means you may be working alongside people with disabilities that have not been disclosed.

Accessibility reviews help ensure that digital resources used for university business are inclusive and do not create barriers for anyone in our community. This includes internal-use digital resources that support work, research, communication, or collaboration.

Because any person can acquire a disability at any time, and because disclosure is not required, we assume our TAMU-CC community includes people with disabilities. Reviewing all digital resources for accessibility helps us maintain an inclusive and compliant work environment.

The time it takes to complete an accessibility review depends on how much information is available about the digital resource. Providing complete and accurate information early in the process helps avoid delays.

• If the digital resource is already in the IT Repository, we may need less information.
• If the digital resource has already been reviewed, approval may be quick.
• If a previous exception has expired, a new exception request must be submitted and reviewed.

Estimated time frames:

• Best case scenario: One to two days
• Worst case scenario: One to two months*

Most delays come from the provider, especially if they are slow to respond or provide incomplete documentation. Delays can also occur if we need clarification from you about the digital resource.

To avoid delays, it is important to bring acquisition requests to IT early in the process. Early coordination allows time for all required reviews and negotiations, including legal protections related to accessibility.

We are required to acquire digital resources that are accessible. If we choose to procure digital resources that are not accessible, we must accept the associated liability risk.

Almost every government agency and university has procured digital resources that are not accessible. Some institutions have more strict procurement policies. Our regulations will soon require more strict procedures as well.

Many providers, including large corporations and universities that develop digital resources for acquisition, still offer products that are not fully accessible. Some providers are not aware of accessibility laws. Others are working to improve accessibility but are not yet fully compliant.

Some accessibility issues cannot be resolved with current technology. Others require time for additional research and development. Our goal is to clearly communicate to providers that digital accessibility is a priority in our acquisition process.

By doing this, we help ensure that all members of our university community, including people with disabilities, can fully participate in academic and business activities without barriers.

The law makes our university responsible for acquiring accessible digital resources. It also makes us accountable for informing third-party providers about accessibility requirements.

Many providers do not have technical teams trained in digital accessibility. They may not know the legal requirements we must follow. For example, accessibility overlays have been involved in lawsuits. It is often the organizations that purchase and use these overlays that are named in the lawsuits, not the companies that sell them.

It is our responsibility to inform providers about accessibility, because it affects whether we can continue using their digital resources in the future. We share educational materials and refer providers to accessibility consulting companies that can help them. In many cases, we are the first to tell them about digital accessibility.

If we do not inform providers, it may affect our business relationships later. We must document efforts to improve the accessibility of digital resources. If a provider refuses to make improvements, we may need to end the relationship.

Some universities have already had to end relationships with providers. These situations can appear in the news and damage reputations. Companies may lose revenue. Universities may lose federal funding or access to programs. Communities may lose services provided by universities.

Improving accessibility is a shared responsibility. A team effort helps maintain strong business relationships and ensures that everyone in our university community can participate fully.

Helping vendors understand digital accessibility requirements can speed up the acquisition process. Many vendors are unfamiliar with accessibility laws and standards. By guiding them early, we reduce delays and improve the chances of acquiring digital resources that meet university needs.

One of the most effective ways to support vendors is by sharing the IT Accessibility Vendor Toolkit provided by Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi.

Key features in the vendor toolkit:

• Accessibility documentation guidance: Vendors learn how to complete accessibility documentation, including the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT), which becomes an Accessibility Conformance Report. This helps us assess whether their digital resource meets accessibility standards.
• Technical accessibility standards: Vendors often ask how their product complies with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) when their product is not web-based. The Technical Accessibility Standards page explains how WCAG applies to desktop software, mobile applications, documents, and other digital resources.
• Clear expectations and legal requirements: The toolkit outlines federal and state laws that apply to digital accessibility, including the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. It also explains how accessibility documentation must be publicly available and accurate.
• Support for improvement: Vendors are encouraged to share roadmaps and timelines for improving accessibility. The toolkit emphasizes that improvement is expected and welcomed, even if full compliance is not yet achieved. They can learn how to improve hardware products. They can also learn how assistive technologies work with their products and where their design and development practices can bridge the accessibility gaps.

By sharing this toolkit and encouraging vendors to use it, we help them understand our requirements and prepare their documentation correctly. This reduces delays, improves compliance, and supports our goal of acquiring accessible digital resources.

We understand that digital resources are essential to your work. Our goal is to ensure that business processes continue and strategic goals are met. However, if a digital resource is rejected, it may be necessary to explore other alternatives.

Here are steps you can take to prepare:

• Allow enough time to explore other options: The justification section in the accessibility exception form includes market research. You should have considered all available alternatives when completing that research. This helps build a strong case and prepares you for a possible transition.
• Allow enough time to plan a transition: If you need to switch to another digital resource, determine what that transition will require. Who will need to assist you? What support will you need? Discuss your plans with IT. They may be able to help with remediation, alternative accommodations, or identifying other digital resources that meet your needs.

We do not want to reach the point where a request is rejected. Early planning and communication help reduce that risk and ensure that your work continues without interruption.

We understand that some digital resources are essential to your work and have been used for many years. Our goal is to support continuity in academic and business operations while meeting accessibility requirements.

To help prevent rejection of a long-standing digital resource, consider the following steps:

• Start the review early: Begin the accessibility review process as soon as possible. This allows time to gather documentation, assess risks, and explore options for improvement or exceptions.
• Document market research and alternatives: When completing the accessibility exception form, include thorough market research. Show that you have considered other accessible digital resources and explain why this one best meets your needs.
• Work with the provider: Ask the provider to complete accessibility documentation and share any plans for improving accessibility. If they do not have a roadmap, encourage them to create one. You can share educational materials and refer them to the IT Accessibility Vendor Toolkit.
• Use the Shift Left approach: Small businesses worry about "eating the elephant" as much as corporations. Small steps and integration into the lifecycle are important. If the digital resource is being updated or maintained, accessibility can be built into the process. TAMU-CC's Shift Left: Keeping Accessibility in Mind Early in the Process provides guidance for planning, designing, developing, testing, and maintaining digital resources with accessibility in mind.
• Communicate with IT: Discuss your concerns and plans with IT. They may be able to help with accommodations, remediation, or identifying alternative solutions.

Even if a digital resource is rejected, complex digital resources are not immediately cut off. You are allowed to document a transition plan to an accessible digital resource. This plan may take several months or even a year to complete. That is not a problem. The goal is to make progress while maintaining continuity in your work.

Accessibility checks are important at every stage of a digital resource's life cycle. Whether the resource is being planned, designed, developed, tested, or maintained, accessibility must be considered.

To help guide this process, Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi provides a resource called Shift Left: Keeping Accessibility in Mind Early in the Process.

This resource encourages teams to address accessibility earlier in the project timeline to avoid costly fixes later. It outlines five key stages:

• Plan: Identify where accessibility compliance will need to be addressed. For example, are you creating new content or adjusting an interface? Make note of areas that will need review time.
• Design: Review visual and usability aspects such as color choices, font size and style, and layout spacing. Addressing these early reduces the need for corrections later.
• Develop: Consider how users will interact with the digital resource. Can a keyboard access all options? Can users tell where they are on the screen? Can interactive elements be paused or stopped if they become distracting?
• Test: Use built-in accessibility checkers in tools like Microsoft 365, Cascade CMS, and Adobe Acrobat Pro. Web browsers also have accessibility tools and plugins. However, automated tools do not catch everything. Manual checks are needed for things like meaningful alternative text and logical navigation order.
• Maintain: Regularly review updates and changes. As technology improves, some accessibility features may become easier to implement. Adjustments may be needed to keep the digital resource compliant.

This process continues as long as the university uses the digital resource. For example, IBM's Equal Access Toolkit shows how accessibility can be built into every phase of a project.

If a digital resource is being developed by a third-party provider, they should complete the Higher Education Community Vendor Assessment Toolkit (HECVAT), focusing on the IT Accessibility worksheet. This form asks about their accessibility practices, training, testing tools, and examples of accessible work.

Not all parts of a digital resource may be accessible at launch. That is why it is important to have a roadmap for addressing any non-compliant items. Whether the plan takes one week or two weeks, the main goal is progress.