This is some of what you really should know about the new framework for all interpreting and other services across the UK. You’ve probably seen that there was BSL levels 1-4 listed as interpreting qualifications and that these, due to public pressure, have been removed from the agreement. Well we haven’t seen confirmation of that yet.
The fact NUBSLI made representations about this and a number of other points, all of which have been passed over, points to a glaringly obvious fact. This framework has not being created in consultation with interpreters, the eventual suppliers of contracts which will be bought from the framework. Or Deaf people who the government hopes will have all public service interpreting via contracts from the framework.
Who has been consulted?
The Crown Commercial Service say they have consulted ‘extensively’. With who? Customers i.e government departments: NHS, DWP and … Organisations i.e. businesses, agencies and “Signature, the commercial arm of NRCPD”.
Who else have they consulted?
Suppliers. Well not the actual suppliers who are interpreters. The larger BSL agencies. Who? Clarion, Sign Solutions, Action on Hearing Loss and Newham Language Shop were the four BSL agencies present at a stakeholder day. The large spoken language interpreter agencies were present: Big Word, Pearl… amongst others.
Have they consulted NRCPD or NRPSI?
Frances Maude MP, Minister for the Cabinet Office and paymaster general, does not mention them in his reply to my letter via my MP Tessa Jowell. Tokenistic phone calls and emails seem to be the only thing that have occurred.
Who else haven’t they consulted?
Deaf people. No consultation, no equality impact assessment. In fact Deaf people have been told very little apart from “we object”. What good is that without action? Inaction is almost as good as saying “we support.”
What can we expect?
More sub-contracting – it is expected up to three agencies will be awarded places on the framework for each Lot. ‘Non-spoken interpreting’ is Lot 4. See above for the likely candidates. Although government has ‘commitments’ to support SMEs to win government contracts, the contracts get ever larger and so do the suppliers. Cross reference: UK-wide MoJ contract with one supplier: Capita, one of the big four.
How do the big suppliers fill local smaller contracts? Sub-contracting. Where does that leave the interpreter? Two businesses taking a fee and less being offered to the interpreter per job.
What does that leave the Deaf person? Usually with a signer because they are cheaper.
Two-hour minimums: interpreters have become an hourly-paid commodity with no value given to experience, training and commitment to the profession. Research shows the Deaf community want committed experienced interpreters who are involved in the Deaf community. More of us are now relying on other paid work to top up interpreting hours. Many have taken on interpreting as a second job to make up hours/pay from other part-time work. Nearly 50% are considering leaving the profession and of those most have over 10 years experience. The Deaf community are getting the opposite of what they want.
Reduced quality and standards:
In the framework if a supplier can not get a qualified interpreter they can just put in the next best thing. As we have seen with existing contracts, that will be anyone with a basic sign language qualification. The standards quoted are lip service, with next to no monitoring of government contracts (link) the agencies will run riot.
How wide-spread is this framework likely to be?
It will operate across the UK.
80 customers have been consulted: government departments, local authorities, the NHS, DWP i.e. AtW.
A clause in the draft language specification states that agencies with a place on the framework must encourage other statutory organisations to purchase contracts from the framework. The clear intent is that all interpreting UK wide, signed and spoken, will go through one very large framework with up to three suppliers on each lot.
What about monitoring and evaluation?
There is none. Well companies do their own which means the same thing. They are always going to come out looking great, despite what is happening on the ground.
And where are we currently? Months behind their deadline CCS are rushing through what will be the biggest disaster for both the interpreting profession and Deaf people. Contracts are supposedly with lawyers and there are no reassurances that when back they won’t just be put out for tender without consultation. Notices are supposed to go out by the end of January and the go live date is April. But then with a contracts this full of loopholes why would the government want to consult with anyone?
Join NUBSLI, we oppose the framework.
outsourcing
There are 24 posts filed in outsourcing (this is page 4 of 12).
Independent Review of MoJ Interpreting Services Contract
An independent review is being carried out of the MoJ’s dire interpreting contract with Capita. Hopefully this spells this end of the contract which has supposedly saved millions. If there was ever a full cost benefit analysis, it would show it has wasted much more than the purported savings.
The survey invite has been sent to ASLI, NRCPD, NUPIT and NRPSI as the high-profile organisations who represent interpreters in the UK. It is not clear from the invite if the Association of Lipspeakers or any Deaf professionals working in the justice system have been invited to comment (see letter below for contact details). Anecdotally many Deaf people have told of the decrease of interpreter provision and quality although many experienced court interpreters are still working when they can get the terms and conditions they are used to.
Please do fill out the survey if you have worked in court or experienced the MoJ’s interpreting contract on the ground. We look forward to the results and whether this will change anything.
Dear Madam/Sir,
Matrix, an independent consultancy, has been tasked by the Ministry of Justice to carry out an ‘Independent Review of Quality Assessment within MoJ Language Services Framework’.
This project is a review of the quality of interpretation and translation services provided in the justice sector under the MoJ Language Services Framework. To this end, Matrix seeks to gather evidence of and stakeholder input on the current state of play regarding the quality of interpretation and translation in the justice system, the relevant quality / experience requirements for interpreters / translators and current procedures for monitoring, evaluating and maintaining the quality of interpretation and translation. In this context, we are targeting all interpreters working in the UK justice system.
We would therefore highly appreciate it if you could fill in an online questionnaire, indicating your perceptions and views, by accessing the following link:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XGZRCGK
Filling in the questionnaire should not take longer than 15 minutes. The survey will be open until Friday, 11th April 2014. All results will be anonymised for the final report.
Thank you very much in advance for your input and time.
In case you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact us on Mirja.Gutheil@matrixknowledge.com.
Aurélie Heetman
Consultant
<image001.jpg>
London | Brussels | Washington DC
1st Floor | Kemp House | 152-160 City Road | London | EC1V 2NP
d: +44 (0) 20 7553 4803 t: +44 (0) 20 7553 4800
e: aurelie.heetman@matrixknowledge.com w: www.matrixknowledge.com
twitter.com/matrixknowledge www.linkedin.com/company/matrix-knowledge