Supporting Transparency in Institutional Procurement 🏛️🔎
Our Role 🤝
VitalSource does not determine whether content is “accessible” or “compliant.” ⚖️
Accessibility compliance is contextual and institution-specific. It depends on:
Intended instructional use 🎓
Available accommodations ♿
Institutional policies 📜
Procurement risk tolerance 📊
A binary “accessible / not accessible” designation would oversimplify that complexity and potentially misrepresent a title’s suitability in different contexts. ⚠️
Instead, our role is to:
Surface publisher-provided accessibility claims 📦
Clearly label metadata sources 🏷️
Provide structured conformance signals 📑
Enable institutions to evaluate content aligned with their own requirements 🔎
VitalSource does not audit, validate, or independently verify publisher accessibility claims or certification documentation. 🚫
What Are Accessibility Metadata Tiers? 🧩
Accessibility Metadata Tiers reflect only the presence and structure of publisher-provided accessibility metadata and related documentation signals within VitalSource systems. 📊
They:
Do not evaluate accessibility quality 🚫
Do not represent a compliance determination ⚖️
Do not certify legal conformance 📜
They are a transparency and documentation maturity indicator, reflecting feature transparency, standards references, and certification signals. 🔎
Accessibility Metadata Tiers Overview 📚
Tier 0: No accessibility claims provided.
Tier 1: Accessibility feature metadata (“Ways of Reading”) provided.
No formal conformance statement included.Tier 2: Conformance statement provided without explicit WCAG version and level reference.
Tier 3: Accessibility features + conformance statement explicitly referencing WCAG version and level (e.g., WCAG 2.x Level A, AA, or AAA).
Tier 4: Accessibility features + WCAG-referenced conformance statement + certification documentation.
Tier 5: Accessibility features + explicit WCAG 2.1 or 2.2 Level AA (or higher) conformance + certification documentation.
Higher tiers reflect stronger documentation signals — not stronger accessibility. 📈
Why This Matters 🌍
Institutions increasingly conduct accessibility due diligence as part of procurement and audit workflows in light of evolving accessibility regulations, including ADA Title II updates and global standards. ⚖️
Providing structured, standards-aligned accessibility metadata:
Increases discoverability 🔎
Reduces procurement friction ⚙️
Supports institutional audit documentation 📑
Demonstrates proactive transparency 📊
Important Clarification ⚠️
Accessibility Metadata Tiers:
Do not determine whether a title is accessible 🚫
Do not replace institutional review processes 🏛️
Do not guarantee compliance ⚖️
Do not evaluate fitness for a specific use case 🎓
Do not validate or verify the accuracy of publisher claims or certification documentation 🔍
They reflect only the presence and structure of publisher-provided accessibility metadata within VitalSource systems. 📦
How Publishers Can Improve Their Tier 🚀
Publishers may strengthen documentation maturity by:
Providing structured “Ways of Reading” metadata 📖
Including conformance statements that explicitly reference WCAG version and level 📏
Supplying Accessibility Conformance Reports (ACEnsuring consistency across ONIX, EPUB, and bulk uploads 🔄
Our team can support bulk metadata uploads and gap analysis. 🤝