Advertisement

Few Agencies Aware of Language Law, Audit Says

Share
TIMES STAFF WRITER

A state audit has found that only two of 10 California agencies reviewed were aware of their responsibility under a 1973 state law requiring them to translate materials into languages spoken by non-English speakers.

The findings by the California state auditor, which were released last week, revealed that only one agency translated its forms and other materials into the languages of non-English speakers who comprise more than 5% of the population it serves.

Advocates of limited English speakers said the review highlights what they have contended for years: Many residents are blocked by language barriers and are unable to get the critical information on health and social services they need.

Advertisement

“It’s important to have an acknowledgment that there are laws on the books here in California,” said Angie Wei, a policy analyst for the California Immigrant Welfare Collaborative, a coalition of four groups, including the Asian Pacific American Legal Center and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. “There’s a disconnect between what people need and what people get.”

Her group was one of several that pushed for a state audit to determine if publicly funded agencies--including the state Department of Health Services, the Department of Social Services and the Department of Aging--are complying with the state’s Dymally-Alatorre Bilingual Services Act of 1973.

The law requires that agencies hire a sufficient number of bilingual staff and provide translated documents for the non-English speakers who make up at least 5% of the populations they serve.

Perez’s office is looking into possible language barriers in Los Angeles County’s welfare-to-work program. “These are people who want to work and need to work, but can’t fill out the forms,” he said.

The only two agencies audited that had established procedures to periodically assess their ability to provide bilingual services to clients were the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Department of Social Services.

But, in other areas of the audit, specific state agencies were not named for deficiencies or compliance to the act.

Advertisement

Where there is language assistance, the state found inconsistencies. The state Department of Health Services translated its materials into a dozen languages. But while 169 forms and 155 publications were available in Spanish, only five forms and 11 publications were translated into Hmong.

A spokeswoman for the state health services office said the agency is reviewing the audit. “Our managed care program has made a very strenuous effort to relate to beneficiaries in their own languages and cultures,” said spokeswoman Lea Brooks.

In Los Angeles County, the Board of Supervisors has ordered the county Department of Health Services to form a committee to address the various cultural and linguistic needs of its patients. The committee met for the first time last month, and standards it develops will be forwarded to the board, possibly by spring, said Kathleen Torres, director of the department’s Office of Women’s Health.

Counties often are inconsistent in how they follow state and federal bilingual laws, Wei said.

On Friday, she was wrestling with a county-administered state cash assistance program for immigrants, but the application forms are printed only in English.

“It’s outrageous to me, especially when you know who your target population is,” she said.

The audit’s other findings include:

* Eight of 10 state agencies that were audited did not have established procedures to regularly review what bilingual services they should provide. Those agencies rely on a language survey conducted three years ago, which may be outdated.

Advertisement

* County health departments are more likely than other local agencies to review non-English speakers’ needs and offer assistance, but many clients still have to translate their own materials.

* The State Personnel Board could do more to fulfill its responsibilities under the act. It neither evaluates nor follows up on the reports that state agencies must file to show how they will correct bilingual deficiencies.

Advertisement