Language Access Work Group - Meeting 6 of 6

Anita Maguire

Anita Maguire

Participants

Malia Wallace-Mello  

Anita Maguire

Fatma Abdinasir

Absent

Farhiyo Ahmed

Absent

Anita Ahumada

Absent

Angela Araque

Absent

Gabrielle Bachmeier

Absent

Liz Baxter

Absent

Lorna Bien

Absent

Tara Bostock

Pass – To share time for other participants; raising awareness and certification for indigenous languages

“What will replace the ‘blanks’ or ‘No’s’ in the table, i.e. under Test Prep Training?”

DSHS; Ruiqin Miao, PhD

Dr. Ruiqin Miao of DSHS response to Tara:

“Thank you for raising this question. As we know this work group is only several months and we have to submit a report based on that timeline. These options are a very general vision. These are specific details to consider further, once the Legislature will select the general options that serve Washington State best.”

Milena Calderari-Waldron

Pass – To reach consensus with Interpreters United (WFSE)

Interpreter’s United (Labor Union)

“I want to understand that the process of voting is correct. DSHS solicited draft recommendations from the work group participants, posted on the website, and in parallel, DSHS drafted it’s own recommendations. Is this correct?”

DSHS; Ruiqin Miao, PhD

Dr. Ruiqin Miao of DSHS response to Milena:

“Thank you for Union’s input and suggested recommendations, that we received yesterday, that this was too late to incorporate into the Options Table posed on the website for today. The Union’s input will certainly be included in the report to the Legislature.”

Gwendolyn Cash-James, EdD

Absent

Vicky Chan

Option 1 – Convenient certifying body for interpreter certification with focus on test and certify

Faye Chien

Pass

Carolyn Cole, Esq.

Absent

Nadia Damchii

Absent

Jessie DeWoody

Absent

Helen Eby

Pass – Stated a need to reach consensus with fellow Interpreters United (WFSE) members. Addressed that the option for DSHS to continue medical interpreter testing was missing from the options table.

Rep. Carolyn Eslick

Pass

Rep. Darya Farivar

Pass

Marguerite Friedlander, Esq.

Absent

Sherri Fujita

Absent

JoAnna Gaffney

Absent

Zugey García

Option 2 – L&I for partnerships. Requested clarification regarding the timeline for the report and tally of poll results. The Project Manager confirmed the timeline and the process.

Jon Gould

Absent

Luisa Gracia

Pass - Addressed that the option for DSHS to continue medical interpreter testing was missing from the options table.

Aranzazu Granrose

Pass

Tony Griego

Absent

Carolina Gutierrez

Pass

Lynora Hirata

Option 5 – To confer with team

Larysa House

Pass – To confer with team/colleagues

Carrie Huie-Pascua

Pass – To confer with team/colleagues

Agata Ianturina

Absent

Jarrod Irvin

Option 4 – Support and to confer with the team

Teddy Kemirembe

Absent

Cristina Labra

Option 5 – Most comprehensive, though unrealistic while most ideal. Option 1 – Most realistic, but not ideal. Pass – To confer with team

Trisha Lamb

Option 2 – L&I partnerships

Shelby Lambdin

Absent

Elena Langdon

Absent

Emily Lardner, EdD

Absent

KaraLynn, PhD

Absent

Eliana Lobo

Pass – Abstain on basis of consensus not reached. Open to working with community colleges

“Personally, I would recommend Option 1 that include partnering with community colleges. Considering partnering, would work with one class through multiple college venues, simultaneously online. To qualify and justify the courses, needing a cross platform solution to maintain seats and the class.

Ruiqin Miao, PhD

Pass – To confer with DSHS Team

Throughout the discussion, Dr. Miao replied to participants’ comments. Please see her replies to comments throughout this table. Additionally, when she was called on to provide input on the options, Dr. Miao took some time to address questions from participants.

Dr. Miao stated that she would pass on sharing her opinions for the options, but shared her primary position that a solution generally be based on a system of testing that is efficient, sustainable, and has quality tests (well developed, reliable, and approved) through national third-party providers and community colleges.

In response to an observation that the recommendation to the legislature should include the option for DSHS to restart its medical interpreter testing program, Dr. Miao said that using medical interpreter testing is neither sustainable nor efficient. Certifying interpreters with seriously outdated, 30-year-old tests would not result in being confident of the quality.

If DSHS continues with manual testing, there would be a long wait for a spot. There are well established professional entities that maintain and update, through both online and remote testing systems, that can do this. In-person testing is not efficient.

According to the fiscal note from Senate Bill 5304, it costs the state a lot of money to redevelop valid and reliable medical interpreter tests for the whole state. Whether through community colleges or third-party providers, if we can ensure that the testing system is convenient for candidates, to address the increasing needs of the State, it will be a good goal for Washington State.

Leroy Mould

Pass

Natalya Mytareva

Abstain. Option 1 – Representing CCHI; an efficient pathway to assess competency of interpreters regardless of training. Option 4 – Connecting with partners to create CE training

Fidelie Nawaj

Absent

Gustavo Negrete

Abstain – Representing NBCMI

Hugo Nuñez

Option 2

Olga Okhapkina

Option 1 – Need opportunities for partnership

Casey Peplow

Pass

Lauren Platt

Absent

Christina Pourarien

Absent

Theresa Powell

Absent

Jennifer Price

Pass

Joana Ramos

Pass – Representing WASCLA; to recommend interim solutions and convey observations

Cindy Roat

Option 1 – Caveat; Option 1.5+

“I am concerned about the difference between people who are getting certified now and those who are trying to maintain their certification. Some options may work really well for one, but not address the other. I want to make sure the Legislature take this into account. What would you recommend, when ranking these options and should I include in my comments?”

DSHS; Ruiqin Miao, PhD

Dr. Miao of DSHS response to Cindy:

“To maintain DSHS certification – These options are for testing to certify going forward, with currently certified interpreters in the State. No matter what Washington State decides, DSHS will ensure a smooth transition of data to a new testing entity or if DSHS continues to maintain the roster in Gateway.”

Glorivette Rodriguez

Absent

Elsie Rodriguez Paz

Option 1 – Option 1.5+ Resume testing that qualify interpreters to provide patient care and involve community colleges that is sustainable. Option 5 – Ideal but unrealistic, a system that involves Community Colleges

John Rogers

Absent

Zenaida ‘Z’ Rojas

Option 2 – Diversity of CC’s. Authentically communicating cultural humility and quality of interpretation

Matteo Rutherford

Absent

Elena Safaraints

Absent

Sen. Rebecca Saldaña

Absent

Roy Salonga

Absent

Manny Santiago

Absent

María Sigüenza

Option – Noted that an ideally, testing is pulled out of DSHS and housed in a state centralized office. Testing to be more democratic with greater needs, in its own entity. She took issue with not including DSHS to continue medical interpreter testing in the options table and suggested a minority report be included.

Yvonne Simpson

Pass – Stating a position of support for national certification. Made a note of concern for how current DSHS certification and certified interpreters might be lost in the transfer to third-party entities and not be able to maintain their certification. She held that separating community colleges as only being the training party and not conducting the testing, is appropriate She addressed that Option 5 and the focus of this work group has only been on medical interpreting.

Radu Smintina

Absent

Quan Trần

Absent

Rokiah Vansot

Absent

Elena Vasiliev

Pass

Daniel(le) Vasquez

Absent

Cathy Vue

Absent

Yun-Mei Wang Wilborn

Option 2 & Option 5 – Focus on continuing education from DSHS. Highlighted need on medical terminology

James Wells

Pass – Interim vs long-term solutions. State needs to invest heavily into language access and coordinate around training

Michael Woo

Pass

Antoinette Wynne

Option 2 & Option 4 – To include expectations of LTC and authorize interpreters to be trained through accredited programs, similar to CC. Option 1 – May not be viable. DES contracts are for eligible entities. She stated that Option 1 would require purchasers to be the individual/independent interpreters themselves, with contractors and this changes authority around statewide contract use. Testing and services delivered from the contractors under this option may constitute a potential conflict of interest. Keeping everything separate, testing the interpreters and providing the service from statewide contracts. All interpreters used by DES are asked to meet skills of industry standards and to be in the expectation of the DSHS Language and Testing Certification program, along with training at higher education institutes. Approving the extension of Option 2 or Option 4. Need to define what a statewide contract.

Sandy Yang

Absent

Grace Yoo

Absent