Audit advanced Works with: Any AI

Procurement Accessibility Checklist Audit

Table output Has example

Check how we ask suppliers about accessibility.

The Open buttons send the prompt text as currently shown below to that site only when you click. Fill in the placeholders first.

[VERIFY] is an editorial flag, not a blank to fill. Wherever the prompt shows [VERIFY], check that item against a reliable source before you use it.

Audit our procurement questions on accessibility. Current tender or vendor questionnaire text: [QUESTIONNAIRE]. Types of products we buy: [PRODUCTS]. How responses are scored: [SCORING].

Check whether questions ask for evidence, such as test reports and conformance statements, whether scoring rewards specific answers, whether contract terms cover fixes and updates, and whether someone verifies claims. Flag yes or no questions that invite unsupported assurances.

Return a table with Question, Weakness and Rewrite, a score from 1 to 10 for rigour, and a short list of evidence to request. Contract wording and legal duties are [VERIFY] for [JURISDICTION] with legal counsel.

Add a scoring guide that gives credit for evidence and a plan for post-award monitoring, including remedies if the product does not meet its stated conformance. Suggest a short list of follow-up questions for suppliers that claim full conformance.

Then draft a scoring guide and a due diligence process. Specify what evidence to request for each criterion, such as a conformance report with the date and scope, test results, a roadmap, and customer references from organisations with similar needs. Design a weighting that gives credit for evidence, penalises unsupported claims and treats accessibility as a requirement and not a bonus. Provide contract clause themes to discuss with counsel, such as remediation timelines, reporting and termination, without drafting legal terms. Write a script for a supplier demonstration that includes keyboard-only and screen reader tests carried out by the evaluators. Add a post-award monitoring plan with review dates and a contact route for staff who find problems. Legal and contractual points are [VERIFY] for [JURISDICTION] with a qualified adviser.

Add a short list of red flags in supplier answers, such as claims of full compliance with no test report, or reluctance to share known issues and fix dates.

Separate quick wins from structural problems, and say what to fix first with the reason. Remind me to retest after changes and to record the date, tool and tester for each check.

Fill in before use

Optional: type your details and the prompt above updates. Nothing is saved or sent.

Replace each bracketed placeholder with your own details, then paste into Any AI or another assistant.

Question review (invented tender)
Q: "Is your product accessible?" Weakness: yes/no invites unsupported assurance. Rewrite: "Provide your most recent conformance report, date, scope and the product version tested."
Q: "Do you comply with standards?" Rewrite: "List known issues and planned fix dates."
Scoring: 0 for no evidence, 3 for statement only, 7 for report older than 12 months, 10 for current independent report plus roadmap.
Demo script: evaluators complete three tasks with keyboard only and with a screen reader.
Contract themes for counsel: remediation timelines, reporting, termination [VERIFY].
Rigour score: 3 of 10 before rewrite.

• audit