The measures that can be expected from the recipient to meet its SARA obligations depend on the results of the analysis with four factors, including the services provided by the recipient, the community it serves, the resources available to the recipient, and the cost of different language service options. All organizations would ensure non-discrimination by taking reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to persons who are LEPs. HUD recognizes that budgets and resources for some projects are limited by contracts and agreements with HUD. These constraints can be a significant burden on projects. If a HUD receiver can demonstrate such a hardware load, HUD considers it to be a critical point in accounting for costs in the four-factor analysis. However, refusing to serve LEP persons or failing to adequately provide or delay services to LEP persons would be contrary to Title VI. For example, the Agency may contract with another organization to provide an interpreter if necessary; use a telephone interpreter; or, if it does not constitute an unreasonable burden or delay or deny reasonable access to the client, the Agency may call upon another body in the same municipality with bilingual staff to assist with oral interpretation. While the quality and accuracy of translation services are essential, the quality and accuracy of translation services are nonetheless part of the appropriate mix of LEP services required. For example, to translate non-vital documents that have no legal or other consequences for the LEP people who rely on them, a recipient may use translators who are less qualified than the translators they use to translate important documents with legal or other information on which they rely. However, the permanent nature of written translations imposes an additional responsibility on the recipient to take reasonable steps to determine whether the quality and accuracy of the translations allow LEP persons to have meaningful access to them. These Safe Harbour provisions only apply to the translation of written documents. They are without prejudice to the obligation to provide meaningful access to LEP persons through competent oral interpreters where the application of the four-factor test leads to the conclusion that oral language services are necessary and appropriate.
Conversely, oral interpretation of documents cannot replace the translation of important written documents. For example, oral interpretation of the rules of an intermediate route or hospital treatment station cannot replace the translation of a short document containing the rules of the halfway house or home treatment centre and the consequences of violating those rules. Designated Certified Implementation Advisor (CDO) bodies are an important part of the Assist community. In federally facilitated markets (FMCs), CDOs oversee Certified Application Consultants (CPAs) who are trained and able to assist consumers seeking health insurance options through a FFM. Organizations interested in becoming CDOs designated by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for an FFM must submit an online application and enter into an agreement with CMS. These groups may include community health centres or other health care providers, hospitals or social services. Question: Must the recipient provide language support to persons of a language group if there are less than 5% of the eligible population and less than 50 members of the language group? (b) If there are fewer than 50 persons in a language group that meets the five per cent threshold indicated in (a), the addressee shall not translate important written documents, but shall indicate in writing in the main language of the LEP language group the right to receive a competent oral translation of such written documents free of charge. The “vitality” of a document (or the information it requests) may depend on the importance of the program, information, meeting or service, and the consequences for the LEP individual if the information in question is not provided accurately or in a timely manner.