After five years of contracting omnishambles and nearly one year of NUBSLI‘s campaigning against the biggest framework for interpreting services we’ve ever seen in the profession, we are still waiting for the biggest mess ever to occur.
This blog has recorded and commented on, over those last five years, the damage that large contracts taken by large agencies have done to the Deaf and interpreting communities.
The trend of ever larger contracts continues despite everything over the last five years pointing to this not benefiting the Deaf community. They are no longer Customers, it is now the government department or Contracting Authority i.e. NHS trust, MoJ, DWP and AtW. The interpreter is no longer the Supplier, it is now the Agency. Layers of administration come between Deaf people and interpreters with choice and control removed and interpreters are left fighting for a sustainable career which if they do not have leaves the Deaf community without an adequate supply of quality interpreters who can afford to work full time and be members of the community.
The national framework is being designed by the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) to bring three existing frameworks together. The most important ones for BSL are RM738 face to face interpreting and the Ministry of Justice’s (MoJ) national framework. The companies that won places on the RM738 framework were: The Big Word, Prestige Network and Language Line. For the MoJ a monopoly was handed to ALS then taken over by Capita. Not a specialist BSL agency in sight. No, all they were left with were sub-contracts to these big guns who knew nothing about Deaf people. Interpreters were left fighting for their rates as the squeeze was on for everyone to get their cut.
Although standards were written into the MoJ the competitive mess sub-contracting brought about meant many experienced court interpreters left it to those who’d accept less. The excellent interpreters booked directly and well-respected by individual courts were pushed out unless they were willing to jump through administrative hoops and be booked by subcontracted agencies, one of whom knew little about legal work, the other dropping its own standards for the sake of saving its business.
Meanwhile with RM738, standards were not exactly high on the list of priorities. With nothing written into the actual framework and scant monitoring agencies were free to use whomever they chose and unqualified signers with GCSE level qualifications they used. And they cared little. One of three, the Big Word, proclaimed publicly in its evidence to the Justice Committee in 2012 that its, “extensive partnering with local suppliers, including SMEs and the voluntary and third sector (sic) ensures that contracts can be filled at a local level”. The reality is they’ve been one of the biggest blights on the sign language interpreting profession over these five years with Capita being another.
Five years on we have a national framework proposed which is based on the same principles as the others. The strategy seems to be increase administration and sub-contracting (which supposedly fills the government’s SME agenda), ignores the work of the registers (by dictating that agencies produce ID cards and provide CPD to interpreters) and fails to measure or understand the basic needs that interpreting services should be designed to fulfil.
On their procurement pipeline, the CCS states, “We do not set policy on how public sector organisations provide access to interpreting services nor do we determine the appropriate qualification levels for interpreters in particular circumstances. The offering is broad and it is for individual customers to establish their requirements in line with their policies when creating a contract under the framework agreement.” This is just one example of a clear lack of respect in setting standards or even understanding them in the first place.
With basic groundwork not done by government departments the national framework, RM1092, is a house of cards built on quicksand. Those who think that standards have been written in and therefore everything with this framework is now perfectly fine would do well to review the NUBSLI visual above and consider each of the points made. Standards written into a document is one thing, there are many other implications of what such a large, badly planned framework can have. Especially when it is designed to cover every type of interpreting, including Access to Work (AtW). Any choice and control in interpreting provision Deaf people had left is about to be removed and if sustainable fees are not paid to interpreters the knock on effect will likely to leave the profession, and the Deaf community, devastated for years to come.
National Framework Agreement
There are 5 posts tagged National Framework Agreement (this is page 2 of 3).
What do you know about the new framework agreement?
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.