This week we published our third annual report on inclusion in the certified digital verification services (DVS) market. The report helps to monitor inclusion and accessibility in the certified digital identity market over time. This year's report shows continued progress on accessibility, alongside some barriers that still need to be addressed. You can read the full report on GOV.UK.
Digital verification services can help people access services by proving their identity or other information about themselves online. These services must be accessible and inclusive to ensure that all people can benefit from them. The Office for Digital Identities and Attributes monitors inclusion across the certified DVS market to understand where providers are making progress, where barriers remain, and where government action may be needed.
How we monitor inclusion
Services certified against the UK digital verification services trust framework must complete an annual inclusion monitoring survey. This year, 44 organisations across the certified digital verification services market completed the survey.
The survey covers areas including documentation and evidence, accessibility, biometric verification, data collection, and user support. Responses are anonymous and individual organisations are not assessed. Instead, we combine the responses to build an overall picture of inclusion and accessibility across certified digital verification services.
Previous years' reports can be found below:
Key findings
The findings show continued progress in several areas:
- Increased compliance with AA accessibility standards: 75% of surveyed organisations reported meeting the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 AA or a higher standard. This increased from 54% in 2024 and is the highest proportion recorded in the three years of inclusion monitoring. The number meeting the newer WCAG 2.2 AA standard increased from 4 organisations in 2024 to 16 in 2026.
- Greater use of accessibility features: 77% of surveyed organisations reported offering at least one accessibility tool, such as text magnification or compatibility with assistive technologies. 25% also reported meeting at least one additional internationally recognised accessibility standard.
- More understanding of user journeys: 80% of surveyed organisations collect information about journeys that users do not complete, and 66% of those collect information about why users stop. Both measures have increased compared with the previous two years.
- Reduced uncertainty about accessibility compliance: The proportion of organisations unsure whether they meet WCAG 2.0 AA or a higher standard has more than halved since 2025, falling to 11%. This suggests that providers have a stronger understanding of accessibility requirements than in previous years.
Cost and limited alternatives remain barriers
While the overall picture is positive, organisations continue to report barriers to improving inclusion.
Cost remains the most reported barrier, with a majority (61%) identifying the cost of implementing inclusive features as a key challenge, up from 50% in 2025. A significant minority (34%) also identified limited access to government-held data as a barrier, down from 48% in 2025.
Alternatives to biometric verification also remain limited. Of the 44 organisations surveyed, 39 reported using biometric technology as part of their service. Around half of those organisations offer another route for people who cannot or do not wish to provide biometric information.
Vouching remains uncommon. Vouching is a process where a person formally confirms someone else’s identity. It can help people who do not have traditional identity documents access digital verification services. Three organisations reported offering vouching, but none currently have a vouching route within the scope of their certification. Organisations identified fraud concerns and reluctance among relying parties (organisations accepting identity checks) as the main barriers to wider use.
What have we learned from three years of monitoring?
This is now the third year of inclusion monitoring, allowing us to build a clearer picture of trends across the certified DVS market. The findings show where progress is being made and where further work is needed.
The findings also show that inclusion cannot be understood through a single measure. Accessibility features and standards are important. So are alternative ways to complete an identity check, information about where users encounter difficulties, and evidence about whether services work for diverse groups. We will use these findings to inform our future policy work and ensure that anyone who chooses to use a digital identity can do so.
Leave a comment