Hiring an accessibility auditor without a formal RFP is one of the most common procurement mistakes organizations make. You end up with inconsistent proposals, hidden scope assumptions, and no structured way to compare vendors.
This template is designed to be sent directly to accessibility audit vendors. It's detailed enough to surface the information you need to make a good selection decision, but concise enough that vendors will actually respond to it.
The most useful thing you can include in your RFP is current data about your site's accessibility state. Organizations that include a baseline violation scan in their RFP get:
More accurate quotes (vendors scope to actual violations, not worst-case assumptions)
A benchmark you can verify vendor findings against
Credibility as a buyer who has done their homework
A natural filter: vendors who ignore your baseline data are less rigorous
Accessalyze provides a WCAG 2.1 AA automated scan for $19 one-time. Run your scan, attach the report to your RFP, and note the violation count in Section 2 of the template below.
Run your baseline scan before sending the RFP
WCAG 2.1 AA automated scan, full violation report, PDF/HTML export. One-time, no subscription.
Copy the section below and customize the [bracketed fields] for your organization.
Request for Proposals: Web Accessibility Audit Services
Issued by:[Organization Name] Issue date:[Date] Response deadline:[Date, e.g., 14 days from issue date] Primary contact:[Name, Title, Email]
1. Background and Purpose
[Organization Name] is soliciting proposals from qualified accessibility audit vendors to conduct a comprehensive WCAG 2.1 Level AA audit of our web presence.
The purpose of this audit is to:
Identify all accessibility barriers affecting users with disabilities
Document violations with sufficient technical detail to enable remediation
Produce a conformance report suitable for [legal response / enterprise procurement / internal compliance — choose one or all]
Driver for this engagement:[Select and expand as applicable: Received ADA demand letter / Preparing for government contract / Proactive compliance initiative / Executive mandate / Other: ___]
2. Scope of Audit
Primary URL:[https://www.yoursite.com] Site type:[e.g., Corporate website / E-commerce / Web application / Government portal / University site] CMS/framework:[e.g., WordPress / React / Drupal / Squarespace / Custom] Approximate number of unique page templates:[e.g., 15] Pages or flows requiring authentication:[Yes / No — if yes, describe]
Pre-audit baseline data:[Attach Accessalyze automated scan report if available. Note: Automated scan identified X violations across Y pages. Vendors are expected to conduct independent assessment but may reference this data.]
3. Technical Requirements
Conformance standard: WCAG 2.1 Level AA (minimum). Respondents may optionally address WCAG 2.2 or Section 508 if applicable.
Required testing methodology:
Combination of automated scanning and manual review (specify percentage breakdown in proposal)
Keyboard-only navigation testing
Screen reader testing with at minimum: JAWS + Chrome (Windows), NVDA + Firefox (Windows), VoiceOver + Safari (macOS)
Proposals relying exclusively on automated scanning will not be considered.
4. Required Deliverables
Respondents must confirm they will provide all of the following:
Audit Report — A structured report listing each violation with: WCAG success criterion, severity classification (critical/high/medium/low), affected URL(s), user impact description, and recommended remediation approach. Format: PDF and/or HTML.
Fix Specification — Technical guidance (code examples or implementation notes) sufficient for a frontend developer to implement each fix without additional vendor engagement.
Executive Summary — 1–2 page summary of overall accessibility posture suitable for non-technical stakeholders and legal review.
Conformance Statement / ACR — A signed Accessibility Conformance Report or conformance letter [required / preferred — choose one] documenting conformance status. This must be deliverable to [legal counsel / procurement authority / enterprise customer — specify].
Remediation Tracking File — A spreadsheet or issue-tracker export listing all violations with fields for tracking fix status.
Optional deliverable (indicate if included at no additional cost):
Post-remediation re-test and updated conformance statement (if remediation is also in scope — see Section 5)
5. Remediation Services (Optional)
[Include this section only if you are also seeking remediation. Delete if audit-only.]
Respondents may optionally propose remediation services in addition to the audit. If proposing remediation, please provide:
Whether your firm implements code changes directly, or provides developer guidance for our team
Estimated hours and timeline to resolve critical and high-severity violations
Your process for verifying fixes (re-test methodology)
Warranty or guarantee terms: what happens if violations recur within X days of remediation completion?
Approach to preventing accessibility regression during future content or code updates
Note: Overlay-based solutions (JavaScript widgets that patch accessibility at the browser layer) are not acceptable as a remediation methodology for this engagement.
6. Vendor Qualifications
Please address the following in your proposal:
Team credentials: List relevant certifications held by team members who will work on this engagement (e.g., CPACC, WAS, ADA Coordinator Training). Include number of certified staff.
Screen reader expertise: Confirm which screen reader/browser combinations your team uses for manual testing and the experience level of testers.
Comparable engagements: Provide 2–3 examples of similar audit engagements (similar site type or scale). Client names may be anonymized. Include scope, timeline, and a brief description of findings.
References: Provide contact information for 2 references from past accessibility audit clients willing to speak with our evaluation team.
Insurance: Confirm general liability and professional liability (E&O) coverage amounts.
7. Proposal Requirements
Your proposal must include:
Cover letter (1 page max) summarizing your approach and why your firm is the right fit
Technical approach: how you will conduct the audit, methodology breakdown, tools used
Team bios (brief): who will be assigned to this engagement and their relevant experience
Timeline: estimated schedule from contract signing to final deliverable delivery
Pricing: itemized by phase (audit, deliverables, remediation if proposed). Indicate whether pricing is fixed-fee or time-and-materials.
Proposals that do not address all required sections will not be evaluated.
8. Evaluation Criteria
Criterion
Weight
Technical approach and methodology (manual vs. automated balance, screen reader coverage)
30%
Team qualifications and certifications
25%
Price and value (fixed-fee preferred)
20%
Comparable project experience and references
15%
Timeline and availability
10%
[Adjust weights as appropriate for your organization's priorities. Price weight should be reduced if legal risk or enterprise contract is the primary driver.]
9. Submission Instructions
Submit proposals by [Date] to:
[Name] [Title] [Email]
Proposals should be submitted as a single PDF. Questions must be submitted by [Date, typically 5–7 days before deadline] to [email]. All questions and responses will be shared with all respondents.
[Organization Name] reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to waive informalities, and to accept the proposal deemed most advantageous to the organization. This RFP does not constitute a commitment to award a contract.
How to Evaluate Responses
Once proposals are in, use this framework to assess them efficiently:
Immediate disqualifiers
Proposes an overlay widget as the primary compliance solution
Cannot provide references from similar engagements
No certified staff assigned to the engagement
Proposal relies on automated-only testing
Does not provide a fixed-fee quote when requested
Green flags
Methodology section references specific screen reader/browser combinations (not just "we use screen readers")
Quote is scoped to your specific site, not a generic rate-card estimate
Team includes WAS-certified (Web Accessibility Specialist) testers, not just CPACC
Vendor acknowledges your pre-audit baseline data and explains how their approach relates to it
Deliverable list includes a signed conformance statement, not just an internal report
Timeline includes buffer for your team's review of the draft report
Pricing reasonableness check
Site Type
Reasonable Audit-Only Range
Red Flag if...
Small marketing site (10–20 templates)
$3,000–$8,000
Quote exceeds $15,000
Mid-size site with forms/login (20–50 templates)
$8,000–$18,000
Quote under $4,000 (scope likely too narrow)
Large web application (50+ templates, complex flows)
$15,000–$35,000
Fixed-fee refused, time-and-materials only with no cap
Government / Section 508 + WCAG combined
$20,000–$50,000+
No Section 508 experience referenced
Typical Procurement Timeline
Phase
Duration
Run baseline scan (Accessalyze)
Same day
Customize and issue RFP
1–2 days
Vendor Q&A period
5–7 days
Proposal deadline
14 days from RFP issue
Evaluation and vendor shortlist
3–5 days
Reference checks
3–5 days
Contract negotiation and signing
5–10 days
Total procurement to contract
4–6 weeks
If you're under legal time pressure, compress the timeline: issue the RFP with a 7-day response deadline, skip the full Q&A window, and call references in parallel with vendor evaluation. Communicate the urgency upfront — qualified vendors will prioritize responsive buyers.
Pro tip: Send your Accessalyze scan report to all respondents with the RFP. It sets expectations, narrows the scope of vendor discovery work, and signals that you're a sophisticated buyer. Vendors will scope more accurately and price more competitively.
Start with a $19 baseline scan
Before you send this RFP, know your violation count. Accessalyze gives you a full WCAG 2.1 AA automated report — attach it to your RFP and walk into vendor negotiations with data.