Ask whether an ACR exists for the exact KOKO offer
An Accessibility Conformance Report, or ACR, documents how an information and communication technology product supports applicable accessibility criteria. A VPAT is a commonly used template for producing that report. The terms are often used together, but a completed vendor report is not the same thing as the blank template and is not automatically independent certification.
Homebot One's public overview says KOKO is in development and emphasizes readable interaction, but that language does not establish conformance with a specific accessibility standard. Request the current ACR, if one exists, for the exact hardware, software, documentation, and support package under consideration. Evaluate the evidence against the people, tasks, and product version in scope.
Confirm scope before reading individual criteria
A robot experience can span physical controls, voice or visual interaction, a mobile or web interface, setup flow, account recovery, alerts, electronic documents, and technical support. An ACR may cover only some of those components. Start with the report date, product name, version, author, standards edition, evaluation methods, and tested environment. Ask which functions and accessories are excluded.
Federal Section 508 applies to information and communication technology developed, procured, maintained, or used by covered federal agencies. Other organizations can still use an ACR as evidence, but they should identify their own legal and functional requirements. Do not say a private household is required to use Section 508 simply because an ACR is available.
- Robot hardware and controls included in the report's scope
- Companion mobile, web, desktop, or embedded software
- Setup, authentication, alerts, and account recovery
- Electronic documentation, tutorials, and release notes
- Help desk, training, repair, and other support services
Read each conformance statement with its remarks
A useful review does not count the number of rows marked Supports. Read the applicable criterion, the reported conformance level, and the explanation together. A report should make clear which feature, workflow, platform, and limitation the statement addresses. Phrases such as Supports, Partially Supports, Does Not Support, or Not Applicable need evidence in the remarks rather than a bare label.
Look for the evaluation method: automated checks, manual inspection, assistive-technology testing, user testing, code review, or another documented approach. Ask who performed the work and on which build. If a core workflow is partially supported, identify the exact step that fails, the affected users, any workaround, and the planned correction. A workaround that requires another person may not preserve independent use.
- What exact user task does the row affect?
- Which input and output modes were tested?
- What assistive technologies and versions were included?
- Is the limitation permanent, configuration-dependent, or planned for correction?
- Can the buyer reproduce the claimed result?
Validate the report with functional task testing
Section508.gov tells federal buyers to review an ACR and validate claims through accessibility testing. Build a small test around the intended KOKO workflow: receiving an alert, starting and stopping a routine, understanding robot state, changing a setting, recovering from an error, getting help, and revoking access. Include disabled users and accessibility specialists appropriate to the context, with consent and safe test conditions.
Test the complete path rather than the most accessible screen. A web page may be operable with a keyboard while a required physical control, sound-only cue, time limit, pairing step, or support interaction remains inaccessible. Record task completion, assistance, errors, recovery, comfort, and the exact version. Do not generalize one participant's result to every user with a similar disability.
Carry accessibility requirements into support and updates
Put essential accessibility requirements in the written offer, pilot plan, or contract. Name the workflows, supported assistive technology, documentation format, training accommodation, response path for barriers, remediation timing, and process for reviewing changes. If an ACR is part of the decision, identify its date and version so a later report cannot silently replace the evidence used for approval.
Software, hardware, documentation, and support can change on different schedules. Ask how Homebot One tests accessibility after updates and reports a regression or changed interaction. Set a review point before expanding the trial. Whether the price is right depends partly on the accommodations, testing, training, support, and remediation needed for the intended users.
Build a complete KOKO quote request
Review long-term KOKO software update value
Frequently asked questions
Is a VPAT the same as an accessibility certification?
No. VPAT refers to a template commonly used to create an Accessibility Conformance Report. Review the completed report's scope, claims, remarks, methods, date, and product version, then validate critical workflows.
Has Homebot One published a KOKO ACR?
The Homebot One overview cited here did not include a KOKO ACR when reviewed on October 2, 2026. Ask Homebot One whether a current report exists for the exact build and components you are evaluating.
Does Section 508 apply to every KOKO buyer?
Section 508 governs covered federal-agency ICT. Other buyers may use its standards and ACR practices as useful evidence, but they should determine which legal and functional requirements apply to their own context.
What should I test after reading an ACR?
Test the complete intended workflow, including setup, authentication, controls, feedback, error recovery, documentation, and support, using the relevant assistive technologies and exact product version.
Sources & further reading
From Homebot One, the team building KOKO in Fremont, California.
