Governmentwide Findings

The size and composition of agencies that submitted data for the FY 2025 assessment provides context for interpreting governmentwide accessibility outcomes. Agencies self-reported their size based on estimated federal employee counts at the time of data submission; for this analysis, GSA reclassified one cabinet-level agency as a “very large agency” using January 2026 FedScope data. No other agency classifications were changed.

Sixty agencies submitted data, comprising:

• 8 very large agencies (≥75,000 employees), 7 of these have components
• 10 large agencies (10,000–74,999 employees), 5 of which have components
• 14 medium agencies (1,000–9,999 employees)
• 11 small agencies (100–999 employees)
• 17 very small agencies (<100 employees)

The FY 2025 assessment asked agencies to respond to criteria that fell into four accessibility factors, grouped into two evaluation indices:

• Accessibility Implementation (i-index), which includes:

  • Policy Integration
  • ICT Acquisition and Procurement
  • Testing and Remediation
• Accessibility Conformance (c-index); both an index and accessibility factor

The assessment details each of these accessibility factors in later sections of the report and in Appendix A: Methods.

Findings

GSA evaluated responses to specific assessment criteria to generate an aggregated rating or outcome on a 5-point scale and determine how well an agency fared for each accessibility factor. GSA grouped outcomes into performance categories that ranged from Very Low to Very High, similar to previous years of this report. Table 1 below denotes the outcome scale ranges and corresponding performance categories.

Implementation-Conformance Relationship - Scatterplot Analysis

GSA combined the outcomes for three accessibility factors—Policy Integration, Acquisition and Procurement, and Testing and Remediation—into one summary evaluation index: the Accessibility Implementation (i-index). We use this summary index to compare the administration, policy integration and execution of ICT accessibility across the enterprise with the agencies’ overall Accessibility Conformance (c-index). Figure 1 shows the outcomes for each of these indices by agency:

Figure 1. Agency accessibility outcomes scatter plot (i-index vs. c-index).

Figure 1 shows a wide range of outcomes for both Accessibility Implementation and Accessibility Conformance. Implementation outcomes ranged from 0.66 to 4.84, while conformance ranged from 0 to 4.94. The graph shows a positive relationship between implementation and conformance, as demonstrated by the dashed line. Agencies that invest and implement repeatable accessibility processes across the enterprise are more likely to have positive outcomes with respect to accessibility conformance. In general, the better an agency integrates accessibility best practices across the enterprise, the better conformance outcomes they tend to have. The presence of a notable group of agencies where higher implementation levels do not correspond with higher conformance outcomes suggests potential challenges related to the quality of accessibility practices or gaps between implementation activities and measurable results. Some agencies achieve moderate conformance despite limited enterprise integration, suggesting localized or ad hoc success that may not scale or sustain without stronger governance.

For more discrete analysis, we grouped agency accessibility outcomes into four quadrants as shown in Figure 2 with the boundaries ranging from 0 to 2.5 and >2.5 to 5.

Figure 2. Agency accessibility outcome quadrants (i-index vs. c-index)

Figure 3. Agency accessibility outcome quadrant and scatterplot overlay

Reviewed/Updated: March 2026