ProcurementIn the second step of the process, the ATI (Procurement) Reviewer receives information and documents entered into the IT purchase review form. If any information or documents were missing in the original form submittal, the ATI Reviewer will follow-up with either the Purchase Requester or Vendor.
In this step, the ATI Reviewer is responsible to:
| Responsible Person | Consultation | Input(s) | Output(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| ATI Reviewer | Purchase Requester, IT Staff, Vendor | Accessibility documentation (Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR), vendor-provided accessibility testing documentation) | Accessibility documentation has been reviewed |
| ATI Reviewer | Purchase Requester | Completed IT purchase review form, accessibility documentation | Impact determination |
| ATI Reviewer | Purchase Requester, IT Staff | Impact determination | Recommended accessibility review tasks |
First, the ATI Reviewer reviews the accessibility documentation for completeness and verifies if the requested product / service meets the definition of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). All purchases of ICT are required to conform to Section 508 Accessibility Standards This link will take you to an external website in a new tab. and require an Accessibility review.
Next, the ATI Reviewer checks to see if the Vendor has provided up-to-date Accessibility Conformance Reports for all requested products and interfaces (e.g. public-facing interface, administrative interface.)
The ATI Reviewer works with the Purchase Requester or Vendor to obtain any missing information or incomplete Accessibility Documentation.
Next, the ATI Reviewer determines the potential impact of the proposed purchase, especially for persons with disabilities.
The ATI Reviewer evaluates the potential impact of the proposed purchase by reviewing use case information entered into the IT purchase review form, and considering what the product/service does, where in the university the product/service will be used and by whom, and how widely used the product/service will be.
Factors that may lead to a high impact determination include:
The CSU ATI Prioritization Framework (*) is a resource that provides detailed guidance about the recommended process campuses can use to determine impact.
* CSYou login required
CSU campuses are still building capacity to fully review all ICT purchases. Per the March 2021 ATI MemoThis link will open a PDF file. (pdf), campuses should take into consideration both impact and campus capacity levels when prioritizing ATI activities such as accessibility reviews.
There are several review tasks that can be combined to complete the accessibility review. It is important to remember that a campus' determination of which review tasks to perform for an accessibility review will depend on many situational factors including impact, campus capacity and capabilities, and any other constraints at the time the review is conducted.
The following section includes a list of possible Accessibility review tasks. The ATI Reviewer will make recommendations for specific review activities that should take place, usually based on the impact determination.
The ATI Reviewer reviews the Vendor-provided Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) and evaluates the stated level of support for each accessibility standard. Next, the ATI Reviewer annotates the original ACR and sends it to the vendor along with a request for any necessary clarifications or revisions.
Read more about Accessibility Conformance Reports.
The ATI Reviewer may request a live demonstration (either in-person or via web conference) for a product or service that is being considered for purchase. The ATI Reviewer would ask the vendor to complete certain tasks while using the product in way that a user with a disability might (e.g. with a screen-reader, without using the mouse, without audio.)
Read more about vendor Accessibility Demonstrations.
Accessibility conformance testing can be performed using automated testing tools. Automated testing tools range from free, browser-based add-ons/tool bars (e.g. open source evaluation tools) up to Enterprise-grade tools for auditing, testing and monitoring.
It is important to note the proper role of automated testing. It is estimated that automated conformance testing can definitively determine compliance for only about twenty-five percent (25%) of web content. Determining compliance for the remaining seventy-five percent (75%) requires either manual testing or functional testing for sensory and mobility impairments.
Still, automated testing can and should play a vital role in many accessibility reviews. The benefits of using automated testing include:
Read more about Automated Accessibility Testing.
Manual, hands-on accessibility testing is performed by users of assistive technology or testers who attempt to use the product while simulating the experiences of users with various disabilities.
Items identified as needing a visual check during the automated testing process are checked during the manual testing process. For example, an automated tool might identify the presence of an image tag <img> in the HTML source code and indicate there is an associated <alt> attribute, but only a manual inspection can conclusively determine if the alt attribute that is present is a meaningful equivalent for the visual data.
Given limited campus resources and the time-intensive nature of manual testing, campuses should take into consideration impact and campus capacity levels when determining the scope for manual testing.
Read more about Manual Accessibility testing.
Code review is most often performed during accessibility reviews for procurements with high impact. This type of review involves examining accessibility gaps at the code level (e.g. HTML source code, JavaScript). The tester does research to determine how to potentially address/remediate specific accessibility gap(s) and finds/develops new/revised coding and does reiterative testing to validate the new/revised coding.
