Brian Beals, LLC

Maryland Nonvisual Access Requirements

Md. Code, State Finance and Procurement § 3.5-311 puts a nonvisual access clause in every Maryland IT solicitation and contract. The obligation runs to whoever signs the award, prime or subcontractor.

The clause is not optional language a contracting officer can drop. § 3.5-311(b)(1) requires it in each invitation for bids or request for proposals, and in each procurement contract, modification, or renewal of a contract issued under Title 13, for the purchase of new or upgraded information technology and IT services.

Who this reaches

Applies to: Executive Branch units and Maryland's public colleges and universities, on IT procurements under Title 13 for new or upgraded technology.
Clause not required when: the essential elements of the technology are visual and no nonvisual equivalent can be developed, or modifying for nonvisual compatibility would raise the price of the procurement by more than 15 percent.
Named exceptions: the Maryland Port Administration; public institutions of higher education, for solely academic or research purposes; the University System of Maryland; St. Mary's College of Maryland; and Morgan State University.

Confirm which category a given task order falls under before assuming the clause applies, or that it doesn't.

The 18-and-12 sequence

For awards on or after January 1, 2020, § 3.5-311(a)(2) sets a fixed timeline once the contract is signed.

Within 18 months of award, the Secretary of Maryland's Department of Information Technology, or a designee, determines whether the technology meets the nonvisual access standards adopted under § 3.5-303(b).
If it does not, the Secretary notifies the vendor in writing. The vendor then has 12 months, at its own expense, to modify the technology.
If the vendor has not modified the technology within that 12 months, it may be subject to a civil penalty, a fine of up to $5,000 for a first offense and up to $10,000 for a subsequent offense, and it shall indemnify the State for liability resulting from the use of information technology that does not meet the nonvisual access standards.

The fine and the indemnification are not the same kind of number. Five thousand dollars on a first offense barely registers against a CATS+ task order. Indemnifying the State for liability tied to noncompliant technology carries no dollar ceiling in the statute. That gap is the part worth pricing.

Why it never shows up in a solicitation

A keyword search of eMMA, Maryland's procurement portal, for "accessibility" returns zero records across all history. The obligation doesn't arrive as a labeled line item in a solicitation. It rides inside the clause language required in every qualifying IFB, RFP, and contract, which makes it structural rather than visible. Easy to hold, and just as easy to forget you're holding it.

The vehicle

CATS+ is Maryland's IT services vehicle, BPO 060B2490023, running through April 21, 2028. The State is not accepting new master contractors. Task orders compete only among the firms already on the vehicle, which makes subcontracting the entry path for anyone not already holding a spot.

872 master contractors hold CATS+ overall. 650 hold FA2, the Web and Internet Systems functional area where this work rides.

15 of 650

Of the 650 firms holding FA2, 15 are veteran-owned. Brian Beals, LLC holds Maryland VSBE certification VB26-100715, approved August 14, 2026 and expiring August 14, 2029. Maryland doesn't issue a certificate for VSBE status. The VB number is the credential.

What I do

The work is conformance evaluation, not remediation: VPAT 2.5 and Accessibility Conformance Report preparation, remediation specifications your team or a subcontractor can bid against, and document libraries brought up to the same standard as the software. I don't do the repair work myself, and keeping that boundary is what makes the report worth reading. A conformance claim written by whoever fixed the technology is a self-assessment, not independent evidence.

The proof

Maryland's own regulations, at COMAR 14.33.02.01 through .11, set nonvisual access standards effective March 1, 2005, with the clause itself placed in the procurement regulations at COMAR 21.05.08.05. Maryland's Department of Information Technology describes the relationship to federal law directly: the State has adopted or paraphrased many, but not all, of the federal Section 508 regulations, and has adopted several nonvisual access regulations not found in the federal rules. A federal Section 508 VPAT is a starting point on a Maryland task order, not an answer to it.

This site carries its own Accessibility Conformance Report, evaluated against all 50 Level A and AA criteria of WCAG 2.1. Read the full conformance report. It is the same document a client receives, produced by the same process, published here because a firm that sells conformance reports should have its own on display.

The firm

Brian Beals, LLC. Service-disabled veteran-owned small business, based in Punta Gorda, Florida.

Maryland VSBE: VB26-100715
eMMA vendor: SUP1105247
MD Small Business Reserve: SB26-100712
SDVOSB / VOSB: SBA-certified, certified August 6, 2026
UEI: NJLEHNAQATJ6
CAGE: 22XM3

Capability statement

One page for your procurement file, written for Maryland.

Accessibility practice, Maryland CATS+Conformance evaluation, VPAT and ACR work, and remediation specifications, framed for Maryland's nonvisual access statute and the CATS+ vehicle.

SDVOSB and VOSB certified, Maryland VSBE certified. A firm that hands you an inaccessible document about accessibility has told you something.

Getting started

Twenty minutes is usually enough to tell whether this fits your capture plan for a specific task order. If the timing is wrong, say so and I will leave it alone.

Get in touch, write to brian@brianbeals.com, or call 941-979-6282.