As explained in the email report of 23 May 2016, the Data Quality Vocabulary (DQV) models conformance by using dct:conformsTo (as done in Geo/DCAT-AP). The relevant section uses GeoDCAT-AP as an example:

https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dqv/#ExpressConformanceWithStandard

This approach was also reported in the Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices published by the joint W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web WG, by using a GeoDCAT-AP-related example (see section on spatial metadata.

However, DQV does not provide a solution to model test results different from "conformant" (e.g., "not conformant", "not evaluated"). The rationale is explained in a note to the same section:

Finer-grained representation of conformance statements can be found in the literature, and applications with more complex requirements may implement them, including for example the requirement of representing 'non-conformance' tested by specific procedures. The GeoDCAT Application Profile, for example, suggests a "provisional mapping" for extended profiles, which re-uses the PROV data model for provenance (see Annex II.14 at [GeoDCAT-AP]). Such patterns come however at the cost of having to publish and exchange representations that are much more elaborate. They will also have to be aligned with the result of another ongoing efforts on data validation and the reporting thereof, as currently discussed around SHACL, for example. We have thus decided to postpone addressing these requirements for now.

Therefore, there is not, at the moment, an alternative solution to the one defined in GeoDCAT-AP.