Julie Dawson (Chief Policy & Regulatory Officer at Yoti). 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inclusion-monitoring-report-2026/inclusion-monitoring-report-2026

On 13 October, the Office for Digital Identities and Attributes (OfDIA) published its third annual report on inclusion in the UK’s certified digital identity services. All 44 providers with a live certified service took part.

The report shows welcome improvements in accessibility and the range of identity evidence accepted. But it also highlights problems that still prevent some people from proving who they are.

Requiring providers to report annually is an important step. It allows the Government, industry and the public to see where progress is being made and where more needs to be done.

What is getting better

• Three-quarters of providers now meet the WCAG 2.0 AA accessibility standard or higher, up from just over half in 2024. Those who could not say whether they met it fell from 23% to 11% in a year.
• 77% offer accessibility tools such as text magnification or compatibility with assistive technology.
• 55% offer telephone or in-person help for people who get stuck, up from 47% last year.
• 80% track where people drop out of a check, and two-thirds of those now track why.
• More than four in ten accept evidence beyond passports, driving licences and photo ID cards, such as the electoral register, bank statements or council tax letters.

Where we must do better

The report also identifies some issues. Lack of identity evidence is still the most common reason people fail a check. Only three certified providers offer vouching – where a trusted person confirms who you are, which is one way of offering verification services to people with no documents at all. Of providers using biometrics circa half offer a non biometric alternative. There may be good reasons for this, including fraud prevention, cost and the requirements of the organisations using their services. However, it is important to understand why and what other options are available.Testing for biometric bias is improving. More providers are using independent laboratories to test their technology, and more have information about accuracy across different demographic groups. However, the report does not establish how differences in accuracy affect people’s ability to complete identity checks.

Why the gaps persist

Many of these problems cannot be solved by providers alone. Organisations are often reluctant to accept vouching because of concerns about fraud, and it cannot currently be used for right-to-work checks because it provides a low level of identity assurance.

Cost is the biggest reported obstacle, cited by 61% of providers. A third of providers also identify difficulties accessing government-held information. The legal powers that would allow public authorities to share information with registered providers have not yet come into force, although this is expected by the end of 2026.

What would make the biggest difference

1. Bring the Information Gateway’s legal powers into force as planned by the end of 2026. This will allow public authorities to share information with registered digital verification providers, enabling people to prove their identity or age using trusted government records rather than relying on passports, driving licences or other identity documents that they may not have.
2. Accept the full range of certified routes. Employers, landlords and lenders should accept every route the standard allows, not default to “passport or nothing”.
3. Measure outcomes for people, not just features. The report itself notes it cannot yet say whether people actually complete a check, or why they don’t. That is the next gap to close.
4. Make vouching a practical and accepted alternative to identity documents. OfDIA’s revised guidance, published in June 2026, provides clearer rules for confirming someone’s identity through a trusted person. Government and organisations should remove unnecessary barriers to its use, test it in practice and ensure appropriate safeguards against fraud and exclusion.

OfDIA says bringing providers and relying parties together would be a useful next step. The ADVP agrees and stands ready to help convene that conversation.

Inclusion is a shared responsibility. Cost remains the biggest reported barrier, cited by 61% of providers. Government and organisations that rely on identity checks must work with providers to ensure accessible, assisted and alternative verification routes are accepted, supported and financially sustainable.

No single method of proving identity will work for everyone. Inclusion requires a range of certified routes, appropriate safeguards and a shared commitment to removing barriers. This report shows the progress being made and where further action is needed.

Source: Inclusion monitoring report 2026, Office for Digital Identities and Attributes, 13 October 2026.