Providing meaningful access to programs and services is central to the work of many nonprofits. When a client, participant, patient, or other member of the public needs interpretation or translation, providing that access can involve more than finding someone who speaks the same language or translating a document. California nonprofits may need to consider when interpretation or translation is required, who is qualified to provide it, and what procedures should be in place to provide effective access while meeting applicable legal requirements.
The Legal Landscape
There is no single language access or translation law that applies to every California nonprofit. An organization’s obligations, if any, depend on factors including its funding sources, programs and services, contractual obligations, the people it serves, and the nature and importance of the communication involved. For example, California Government Code section 11135 prohibits discrimination based on certain protected classifications, such as national origin or ethnicity, in programs and activities conducted or administered by the State, funded directly by the State, or receiving financial assistance from the State. Accordingly, nonprofits with programs or activities that receive state financial assistance may need to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access for people with limited English proficiency, including by providing translated materials, qualified interpreters, or other alternative communication services. The steps required depend on the particular circumstances, including the number of people with limited English proficiency likely to be served, the frequency of their contact with the program, and the nature and importance of the services and communications involved.
Even nonprofits that receive no government funding may have obligations when it comes to language access. For example, they may be subject to California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act if they constitute business establishments open to the public. The Act prohibits discrimination based on primary language, although it does not itself require services or documents in a language other than English beyond what other federal, state, or local law requires. (Civ. Code, section 51(b), (h)). As another example, nonprofits may have contractual obligations in their grant agreements with foundations or other funders that set expectations or requirements around language access. Separate communication requirements can arise under the Americans with Disabilities Act when interpretation or translation assistance is needed because of a disability. For nonprofits open to the public that are covered by Title III, the ADA may require appropriate auxiliary aids and services, such as qualified sign language interpreters or accessible written materials, when necessary to ensure effective communication. (42 U.S.C. section 12103(1); 28 C.F.R. section 36.303).
Given this varied legal landscape, each nonprofit should evaluate the laws, funding conditions, and contractual requirements applicable to its particular programs to determine what language-access measures it must or should implement.
Do Not Assume Multilingual Staff Are Qualified to Provide Interpretation Services
Speaking the same language as a client does not necessarily make an employee qualified to interpret every conversation. For example, California regulations applicable to certain state-funded or state-supported nonprofits establish standards for multilingual employees and qualified interpreters. The regulations define a multilingual employee as a qualified employee with oral proficiency in English and the target language necessary to accurately and readily interpret in the second language. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, section 14100(c)). The regulations separately define a qualified interpreter as a person capable of effectively, accurately, and impartially interpreting spoken or signed communications between people using different languages, both receptively and expressively, using necessary specialized vocabulary and appropriate cultural relevance. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, section 14020(ll)). Helping someone find the correct office is very different from interpreting during a grievance proceeding, an eligibility determination, or a medical discussion.
Nonprofits should also consider the employment law implications of using staff as interpreters. If a nonprofit regularly asks an employee hired for another role to provide interpretation, it should consider whether that responsibility is part of the employee’s duties, whether training is appropriate, and how the additional responsibility affects the employee’s regular workload.
Relying on Family Members or Minors Instead of Qualified Interpreters
In some cases, a client may offer to have a spouse, friend, or child interpret. Whether a nonprofit may rely on that person depends in part on why interpretation is needed and which laws apply. For example, under Title III of the ADA, when interpretation is required to provide effective communication because of a disability, a covered nonprofit cannot require an individual to bring their own interpreter and generally cannot rely on a minor child to interpret except in an emergency involving an imminent threat to safety or welfare when no interpreter is available. Reliance on an accompanying adult is also limited. (28 C.F.R. section 36.303(c)(2)–(4).) Other laws, including requirements applicable to certain health programs, may impose similar or additional restrictions. Even where a particular law does not prohibit reliance on a family member, nonprofits should consider accuracy, confidentiality, conflicts, and the sensitivity of the information being discussed.
Use AI Translation and Interpretation Tools Carefully
Nonprofits using AI for interpretation or translation should consider the importance and complexity of the communication, the risk of inaccurate interpretation or translation, confidentiality, and whether human review is appropriate. An AI-generated translation of a routine scheduling reminder is different from AI translation of an eligibility determination, grievance notice, legal consent form, or other communication affecting a person’s rights or access to services. Organizations should also determine whether the laws, regulations, grants, or contracts applicable to their programs impose specific requirements concerning qualified interpreters or translators, including requirements for human interpretation, translation, or review.
Organizations should also consider whether information entered into an AI translation or interpretation tool may contain confidential, privileged, health, personnel, or other protected information and should understand how the tool collects, uses, retains, and protects that information.
Develop a Language Access Plan Before You Need It
A language access plan helps ensure that staff know what to do before the need arises. Some grants also require nonprofits to maintain a language access plan.
Depending on the organization, a plan may identify commonly encountered languages, important communications and documents, qualified internal or outside resources, procedures for translated materials, appropriate uses of AI, and the process staff should follow when assistance is needed.
Interpretation and translation practices can affect both an organization’s legal compliance and its ability to effectively serve the people who rely on its programs. Nonprofits should periodically review their funding, programs, contracts, workforce practices, and the communities they serve to determine whether their approach remains appropriate and legally compliant. Addressing these issues before a need arises can help staff respond consistently, reduce risk, and increase access to programmatic services.