Extended ADA Title II deadline demands a focus on procurement

Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act covers public services and prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities by state and local governments. It specifically addresses digital accessibility.  

However, while organizations generally understand they must make their digital properties accessible under Title II, the role procurement plays in achieving digital accessibility compliance is often overlooked. 

In reality, any organization subject to Title II is responsible for the compliance of third-party software and digital content that powers public-facing digital interfaces.

This is crucial to understand in light of the Department of Justice extending the ADA Title II digital accessibility compliance deadlines by one year. Most state and local government agencies now have until April 26, 2027, to ensure they are fully accessible to people with disabilities. However, that’s still only eight months.

When you consider the complications inherent to the procurement process, what may have seemed like a respite suddenly looks like a tight timeline for getting accessibility right and meeting compliance requirements. For most organizations, meeting the deadline means starting the necessary work now.

Web development teams for state and local government agencies tend to be quite procurement-heavy, with websites incorporating a wide variety of third-party software and digital content, from online payment processing and e-signature functionality to appointment scheduling, event registration and more. 

This can also include documents such as PDFs contained within data and research repositories. Because the agencies themselves are responsible for digital accessibility — even when an accessibility issue originates with a third party — procurement is actually one of their most important accessibility controls. 

Challenges associated with digital accessibility and procurement are complex, because organizations need to tackle issues on two fronts: 1) Everything they’re already bought needs to be accessible, and 2) Everything they’re going to buy in the future also needs to be accessible.

Addressing the first requires inventorying, auditing and testing existing properties, documenting any issues and creating a prioritized plan with vendors to fix them. Addressing the second necessitates updating procurement processes to ensure every new purchase meets requirements, and to prevent new issues from being introduced into existing systems.

For the Software and Digital Content That's Already in Place

Organizations should start by understanding their current state. Inventory the third-party technology behind public-facing services and programs—websites, mobile apps, SaaS products, plugins, online documents and more. Additionally, review existing vendor contracts and assess high-risk vendors.

When making determinations, avoid relying on vendor documentation alone. Before renewals, decide when products need accessibility testing or usability testing with people with disabilities. And bear in mind that automated testing alone cannot determine accessibility. A combination of automated and manual assessment is the most effective and accurate approach.

When accessibility issues are found and flagged to vendors, track whether they fix them. Monitor responsiveness and require credible roadmaps — especially when barriers are critical.

For New Purchases

Organizations need to make certain that accessibility requirements for new purchases, licenses, renewals and major upgrades are baked into contracts and addressed before purchases are completed. Additionally, organizations must verify vendor claims about accessibility — not just accept them at face value. Accessibility must be treated as an enforceable expectation.

Contracts should include technical requirements, testing, required remediation timelines, reporting and detailed roadmaps for what happens when accessibility issues surface.

Across both efforts, the goals are the same: achieve compliance and reduce risk. There's already momentum around procurement. According to the National Association of State Chief Information Officers’ 2026 survey of state digital accessibility officers, 63% of states now require accessibility language in all RFPs or contract terms, and all but one require it for at least some procurements.

As with anything to do with digital accessibility, the end goal is to prevent issues from emerging in the first place. Fixing issues after they emerge is costly, inefficient and risky. Creating processes that enable accessibility from the start will save organizations time and money, reduce risk and — most importantly — ensure they can provide services that work for everyone.

As organizations start to work through these steps and pursue these goals, there’s something else they should be aware of: the National Federation for the Blind has filed a lawsuit challenging the ADA deadline extensions. If the NFB’s suit is successful, the deadline extensions could disappear, resulting in a reversion to the original dates.

Ultimately, organizations are going to have to achieve compliance regardless of how deadlines may or may not shift. That was the underlying logic behind the extensions in the first place. As I’ve stated previously, the decisions were made to prioritize compliance. The DOJ language itself makes that clear. 

The dates were extended to “ensure that covered entities better understand the rule’s substance to achieve compliance to the benefit of persons with disabilities.” In other words, the extensions are not an invitation to pause. They are an opportunity to get this right.

Addressing procurement is not the only step organizations will need to take to achieve Title II’s digital accessibility requirements, but it’s a vital one. Procurement and risk tend to go hand-in-hand, and purchasing third-party software and digital content can produce a kind of Trojan Horse effect, where it becomes the portal through which risk sneaks into an organization’s ecosystem. 

When it comes to digital accessibility, and when risk leads to compliance failures, the consequences can be severe. Organizations can be sued by the DOJ. They can also face private lawsuits, which can cause not only financial damage but reputational damage as well. 

The good news is that the extensions do offer a legitimate window of time to make meaningful, measurable progress. Yes, procurement is complicated and can be fraught with risk. But it can also be an extremely positive and effective catalyst for achieving ADA Title II compliance.

What it comes down to is preparation. Investing in readiness now helps organizations reduce legal, financial and reputational risk while saving long-term on remediation costs. They’ll also improve usability for all users and strengthen trust with their communities. Digital accessibility is a win-win for everyone.

Glenda Sims is chief information accessibility officer at Deque Systems.