Office of Court Interpreter Services Review of Scheduling and Payment of Per Diem Court Interpreters
January 24, 2017 · Read the full official report (PDF) ↗
Published January 24, 2017 Audit covers July 1, 2013 – May 31, 2015 Under Suzanne M. Bump · 2011–2023
source
“OCIS paid per diem court interpreters without verifying the completeness, accuracy, and authorization of interpreter-submitted daily service records (DSRs) and without confirming that interpreters were scheduled to interpret on the dates for which they submitted DSRs.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
This is a state audit of how Massachusetts courts scheduled and paid per diem interpreters during a period from July 2013 through May 2015.
“This report details the audit objectives, scope, methodology, findings, and recommendations for the audit period, July 1, 2013 through May 31, 2015.”
Auditors reviewed whether interpreter payments were verified, schedules were accurate, interpreters were used efficiently, and services for deaf or hard-of-hearing people were properly overseen.
“In this performance audit, we examined the following: payments made to per diem court interpreters for services reported, scheduling of per diem court interpreters, standards and procedures related to the processes of payment and scheduling, Interdepartmental Service Agreements with the Massachusetts Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (MCDHH), and the use and payment of per diem court interpreters once they are scheduled (regardless of the time actually spent interpreting).”
People who do not speak English well, or who are deaf or hard of hearing, have a legal right to qualified interpretation in court, so the system needs to work reliably and responsibly.
“Massachusetts law states that people who have limited English proficiency (LEP) or are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) have the right to the assistance of a qualified interpreter during legal proceedings.”
If you use the courts, this affects whether language access is available when needed and whether taxpayer money is spent with proper checks.
“Without ensuring that DSRs are fully and accurately completed and authorized, OCIS cannot ensure that per diem court interpreters are properly compensated.”
The auditor concluded that OCIS did not properly verify many interpreter payments, did not keep schedules accurate, and did not sufficiently monitor payments for deaf or hard-of-hearing interpreting services.
“OCIS did not sufficiently monitor payments made for court interpreting services provided to people who are deaf or hard of hearing through its arrangement with MCDHH.”
The report recommended updated procedures, staff training, better scheduling controls, updated court liaison lists, and stronger requirements for MCDHH to provide data or face possible payment withholding or alternative arrangements.
“OCIS should require MCDHH to provide the necessary data, and if MCDHH does not do so, OCIS should consider withholding payment or seeking alternative ways to provide interpretation for DHH people.”
The problems were not small paperwork issues: in the auditor's sample, most reviewed payments had missing, incomplete, inaccurate, or unauthorized records, and many actual interpreter assignments were not on the official schedule.
“Of the 62 payments sampled, 45 payments (amounting to $69,396) should not have been paid because the required DSRs were missing, incomplete, inaccurately calculated, and/or not properly authorized.”
A daily service record, or DSR, is the form interpreters use to document who they are, what court work they did, when they worked, how much they should be paid, and court confirmation of the service.
“The DSR is a standard form used by all interpreters.”
6 figure(s) pending source verification - not shown
What the Auditor checked
- Did not comply Does OCIS ensure that payments made to per diem court interpreters are verified and approved?
- Did not comply Does OCIS’s schedule of per diem court interpreter assignments accurately reflect all interpreter requests made by court locations?
- Did not comply Are per diem court interpreters used efficiently and paid for the services actually rendered?
- Did not comply Does OCIS provide adequate oversight over the Interdepartmental Service Agreement (ISA) with the Massachusetts Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (MCDHH) to provide court interpreting services for people who are deaf or hard of hearing?
What the Auditor found
Why it matters: OCIS could not ensure that per diem court interpreters were properly compensated.
Standard: The 2009 Standards and Procedures of the Office of Court Interpreter Services require DSR verification, correction of errors, return of incomplete DSRs, cross-checking to assignment schedules, and management approval. ( Section 10.02(D) of the Standards and Procedures of the Office of Court Interpreter Services )
3 recommendations
- OCIS should work with the Trial Court’s Fiscal Department to amend the OCIS standards and procedures to reflect the restructuring of OCIS and the new responsibilities of the Fiscal Department.
- OCIS should reiterate the standards and procedures and provide training to its staff regarding the completeness and accuracy of DSRs and the confirmation of scheduling in order to verify the payments made for services performed.
- OCIS should work with all court locations to confirm who the court liaison and delegated backups are and make the necessary changes to the court-liaison list to ensure that the list is up to date.
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "The Trial Court reconvened the Committee for the Administration of Interpreters and a revision [to the 2009 version of the standards and procedures] is currently underway."
Auditor: "We believe that the Trial Court’s decision to reconvene the committee was responsive to our concerns, and we reiterate the standards and procedures should be revised to account for process changes due to OCIS restructuring and added Fiscal Department responsibilities."
Why it matters: Unsynchronized schedules could cause payment-processing problems and postponed trials if interpreters appear available but are actually working elsewhere.
Standard: The 2009 Standards and Procedures of the Office of Court Interpreter Services require courts to request interpreters in advance, require OCIS to schedule interpreters from those requests, and require confirmation before payment. ( 2009 edition of the Standards and Procedures of the Office of Court Interpreter Services )
2 recommendations
- OCIS should consider alternatives to the current scheduling process that would account for the high volume of last-minute requests for per diem interpreters.
- OCIS should reiterate to the courts that per diem court interpreters are required to be scheduled in advance through OCIS, not assigned at the court level.
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "OCIS is in the process of procuring scheduling software."
Auditor: "We believe that OCIS’s decision to obtain scheduling software was responsive to our concerns."
Why it matters: OCIS could not determine whether expenses paid under the agreement were reasonable, allowable, or cost effective.
Standard: Section 6.01(1)(c) of Title 815 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations requires fiscal business arrangements between state agencies to use best value and other good business practices. ( Section 6.01(1)(c) of Title 815 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations )
1 recommendation
- OCIS should require MCDHH to provide the necessary data, and if MCDHH does not do so, OCIS should consider withholding payment or seeking alternative ways to provide interpretation for DHH people.agency: already implemented
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "As a result of MCDHH’s inability to produce those reports, the Trial Court did not [renew its] ISA with the MCDHH."
Why it matters: The Commonwealth paid interpreters for a high amount of time when courts were not receiving interpreting services.
Standard: Section 7.05 of the 2009 Standards and Procedures of the Office of Court Interpreter Services allows compensated waiting time and requires payment in half-day or full-day increments. ( Section 7.05 of the 2009 edition of the Standards and Procedures of the Office of Court Interpreter Services )
1 recommendation
- OCIS may want to revisit its payment policies for per diem court interpreters and consider modifying these policies to limit the amount of time per diem court interpreters can be paid when they are not actually interpreting.