Accessibility: Effective Communication Checklist

Accessibility: Effective Communication Checklist

• Are staff members familiar with video relay services, video remote interpreting, captioned telephone services, telecommunications relay services, and other alternative ways of communicating by telephone and by alternate document formats? Click here for more on these auxiliary aids.
   
• Do staff members know how to process requests for disability-related accommodations, such as qualified sign language interpreters?  Does the ombuds budget adequately provide for such expenses?
   
• In the revised ADA Title III regulations, the legal definition of a “qualified interpreter” is: “an interpreter who, via a video remote interpreting (VRI) service or an on-site appearance, is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary. Qualified interpreters include, for example, sign language interpreters, oral transliterators, and cued-language transliterators.”

The concept of “qualified interpreter” is discussed from a legal standpoint in the Technical Manual of Title III of the ADA (which remains current as of January 2012):

Who is a qualified interpreter? There are a number of sign language systems in use by persons who use sign language. (The most common systems of sign language are American Sign Language and signed English.) Individuals who use a particular system may not communicate effectively through an interpreter who uses another system. When an interpreter is required, the public accommodation should provide a qualified interpreter, that is, an interpreter who is able to sign to the individual who is deaf what is being said by the hearing person and who can voice to the hearing person what is being signed by the individual who is deaf. This communication must be conveyed effectively, accurately, and impartially, through the use of any necessary specialized vocabulary.

Can a public accommodation use a staff member who signs "pretty well" as an interpreter for meetings with individuals who use sign language to communicate? Signing and interpreting are not the same thing. Being able to sign does not mean that a person can process spoken communication into the proper signs, nor does it mean that he or she possesses the proper skills to observe someone signing and change their signed or fingerspelled communication into spoken words. The interpreter must be able to interpret both receptively and expressively.

If a sign language interpreter is required for effective communication, must only a certified interpreter be provided? No. The key question in determining whether effective communication will result is whether the interpreter is "qualified," not whether he or she has been actually certified by an official licensing body. A qualified interpreter is one "who is able to interpret effectively, accurately and impartially, both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary.” An individual does not have to be certified in order to meet this standard. A certified interpreter may not meet this standard in all situations, e.g., where the interpreter is not familiar with the specialized vocabulary involved in the communication at issue. 

• Are confidentiality concerns addressed? Concerns about preserving confidentiality is sometimes stated as the reason for denying accommodations, so staff, ombuds and visitors need to be made aware that the use of interpreters does not necessarily constitute a violation of confidentiality. Instead, interpreters are bound by their professional code of ethics, which often include a tenet of confidentiality. For example, if the interpreter is certified by the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, or a comparable national certification organization for interpreters, the interpreter may be bound by the Code of Professional Conduct to maintain strict confidentiality. 
   
• Are staff members trained on best practices to ensure effective communication with visitors with disabilities?