Potomac Chapter

of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf

  • 11 Jun 2018 2:30 PM | Director of Communication (Administrator)

    Click Image to play video in ASL.

    English Transcription:

    "Hello PCRID Members, I am reaching out to you today to express my thanks for all of the messages, emails, and other outreach that you all have sent regarding your concerns about the selection process for RID’s CEO. 

    The Board and I planned to send a letter, however after RID’s response, we held back our letter and did not send it. We will keep our commitment to you, in that we will watch the selection process closely with the goal of helping to make this process more transparent to our members.  

    Again, we want to extend our appreciation to all of those members who have sent their concerns to us, and I would like to encourage everyone to become more involved in the process. The Board and I review all of the messages you send to us and will work hard to ensure that we make the best decision for our members and our organization."

  • 01 Sep 2014 12:00 PM | Site Administrator (Administrator)

    In this vlog, Miako Rankin, PCRID's liaison with the Maryland Association of the Deaf (MDAD), provides information from this past summer's joint conference of the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) and RID Region 2. 

    The main focus is the NAD's five priorities for the current two year term, which were voted on by the Council of Delegates at the conference. The full list of the NAD priorities can be found at: http://nad.org/about-us/priorities

    In addition to the five priorities, many of which present exciting opportunities for us as professional interpreters and also have various implications for our field, NAD will continue to work with RID at the national level in accordance with our previously established MOU and our shared goals and vision.

    It was exciting to see our success with our joint MDAD-PCRID conference last November mirrored at the national/regional level. The possibilities are endless when we work together as one community, and we look forward to seeing more collaboration between our organizations!

  • 01 Sep 2014 12:00 PM | Site Administrator (Administrator)

  • 01 Mar 2014 10:00 AM | Site Administrator (Administrator)

    English-language text is found here.

  • 01 Nov 2013 11:00 AM | Site Administrator (Administrator)

  • 30 Sep 2011 12:00 PM | Site Administrator (Administrator)

    About the NIC enhancement process
    In late 2009, the Board of Directors for both NAD and RID established the NIC Task Force to work with feedback about the NIC certificatiofrom interpreters, consumers, and others, to reflect changes in the profession and community during the past 10 years, and to align the NIC with ever-evolving best practices in the certification industry.  The Task Force recommended updates to the NIC certification program that address many complex factors around certification.  Such factors involve testing for at least two levels of interpreter ability using separate exams, specialty recognition, eligibility requirements, and more. The multi-year enhancement process will ensure that the NIC is a more reliable, valid, current, and well-understood certification for all who rely on it.
    RID will work with, involve and support the interpreter and Deaf communities throughout the NIC enhancement and implementation process. RID and NAD are committed to a collaborative effort that will benefit from the collective experience and expertise of all groups with a stake in the NIC credential and RID certification program overall. For more information, go to www.rid.org/NICNews.

    Here is the PowerPoint Presentation from PCRID's September 24, 2011 General Meeting "The NIC Changes - Where Are We Headed?" presented by Laura Wickless. If you have any further questions or comments, please contact Laura at nicindependentforum@gmail.com.

    Presenter Notes

    Slide 1 - We saw similar language to now when the NIC was originally created.

    Slide 2 - Example of RID’s fairly recent support for the current NIC. 

    Slide 3 - RID’s communication about the upcoming changes. Similar in some ways to the past with slightly new angle.

    Slide 4 - Starting this fall: NIC is a NIC.  End of tiered system. No more mailing out test recordings. Raters will access a rater queue and view performance exams via computer access. Several raters view portions of a candidate recording which reduces bias. Faster turn around (possibly as little as one or two weeks). Look for and participate in EVERY survey from RID. A Job Task Analysis (JTA) and specialization surveys are coming.  Spread the word to EVERY interpreter. That is how RID will collect information to develop new certification tests.

    • Slide 5 - In 2013, the tentative names for new tests are:

    NIC I - entry level test (will it be equivalent to previous certifications? possibly but unknown)

    NIC II - a more advanced level certification test (must one take NIC I before NIC II? unknown)

    2013 or after: Specialization tests possible in many areas (must one 

    Slide 6 - Many professions offer accredited certification programs. RID is a member of Institute for Credentialing Excellence (ICE). Such membership does not offer any guarantees about RID’s certification programs. Credentials that are accredited offer more guarantees since an organization must follow standards and oversight from an outside body.

    Is RID moving toward accreditation? Unknown, but possible. 

    If RID programs ever became accredited by NCCA at some time in the future, it looks as though certification programs from the period before the accredited ones may not be allowed “grandfathering”. The language is a little confusing, but this may be a violation of NCCA accreditation standards (see NCCA Standards for Accreditation of Certification Programs, Standard 8, section B).

    Slide 7 - There are 21 Standards for NCCA accreditation. We don’t seem to have met them yet. The standards fall into these broad areas.

    Slide 8 - Some interesting issues with structure and governance which could be challenging for RID.

    Slide 9 and 10 - Feel free to contact me with questions at NICindependentforum@gmail.com

    Slide 11 and 12 - Sources for this presentation 

  • 19 Jul 2011 12:00 PM | Site Administrator (Administrator)

    Sign Language Interpreter Licensure is a critical topic to those of us working, providing, and receiving interpreting services in the District of Columbia. What happens in the District could easily affect future licensure laws in the surrounding states of Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia and Delaware. Therefore, it is essential that legislation be done right the first time around.  On April 30, 2011, Andrea K. Smith, Chair of the ad hoc Licensure Committee, presented her findings on the state of licensure laws across the United States. You will find that there no two laws are alike - each state has different structures, requirements and penalties that make the discussion of licensure such a daunting endeavor.

    As our legislators and other vested parties vie for a place at the drafting table, PCRID has a duty to be involved and advocate for the rights of sign language interpreters in our region. Our DCAD Liaison and ad hoc Licensure Committee Chair have been actively participating in meetings, hearings and other discussions; however we need member support and involvement in educating these constituents about the interpreter role and our rights as professional sign language interpreters. We invite you to begin the dialog among your colleagues and get the word out about how licensure is on the horizon and that we need to be prepared.  PCRID appreciates your input on providing recommendations and considerations and we will keep you posted on events and meetings that involve this important topic. For more information, to ask a question or to get involved, please email us at legislativeaffairs@pcrid.org or post a comment on this page.

    This is the PowerPoint Presentation from PCRID's April 30, 2011 workshop "License To Drive: How New Legislation Affects You" presented by Andrea K. Smith.

    Notes From the Workshop

    Groups of deaf people in DC want to propose a law to force service providers to get licensed. They've been burned too many times by the spoken language agencies and other random companies that are getting into the game. Furthermore, it would be only for DC government funded entities that require a service provider to be licensed. So, any entity that gets funds from DC gov’t will have to follow this law. It does not include the Federal government and private companies. Also, it is not based on the individual interpreter, but the service provider. If their license gets revoked, they cannot provide sign language interpreters to those entities that are funded with DC govt monies. Is this the best way to go? Especially considering that it will set a precedent for the surrounding states. I personally, as an interpreter, feel that this is NOT the best way to go. I think we need to take it down to the individual level too. And the law needs to reflect the interests of ALL parties, which includes the interpreters. In the end, WE are the ones paying the licensure renewals every year and getting the penalties for not following the law. Please feel free to weigh in on the discussion.

    1. We have to clearly define the term "qualified" and how it is used in the law. Refer to ADA but other than that, not sure where else to begin. We, as interpreters, may have to draft something up in the way of definitions.
    2. Registration vs. license: With a registration - a person is NOT forbidden to work without the document. With a license - a person IS forbidden to work without the document. In our case, it’s proposed that SOMEONE needs a license in order to practice in DC. It isn't necessarily the individual interpreter, but the actual service provider.  Is this the best way to go?
    3. When it comes to licensure, we (as interpreters) are being told what we are allowed to do and how to do it. That is scary in the sense that the law currently does not truly reflect our work and confines us further.
    4. Andrea presented on 16 different state's licensure laws. Those were the most current to date. There are other states that require registration only. 
    5. To label a person "Deaf or Hard of Hearing" in the law is too narrow of a label, what about individuals with Autism or speech disabilities? Any others you can think of that would be affected by this law?
    6. What about Cuers? What about trilinguals?
    7. There's always a loophole - service providers can somehow figure out to get out of the system. We have to consider them and close those loopholes up.
    8. VRS - Many loopholes for VRS. Licensure is not required from VRS providers. Right or wrong? Should we include them in our laws here in DC/MD/VA/WVA/DE/PA or will they be left out? They're usually excluded because of jurisdictional issues. Perhaps it’s hard to regulate those that are serving individuals in other states. How can the deaf know where to file a complaint when the VI is told not to disclose their location or their names? How do we regulate that? 
    9. Ways that some states define a CDI; they call them a Linguistic Specialist. Good term to use in our laws? What do you think? 
    10. For complaints, some states only give a person 30-90 days to complain. This is NOT enough time. Especially when the deaf person does not feel immediate repercussion from a lousy interpretation until months or years later. How about the interpreter themselves, how do they file a complaint? I'd like a mechanism to be able to do so. Also, it should be easy for the deaf person to complain, they shouldn’t have to get a lawyer to figure out how to complain or go into a office to file it. It should be accessible.
    11. PCRID should set up a page about "How to become an interpreter" - in the FAQ. 
    12. Licensure costs money people. Some states charge a fee up to $300 a year. Are there an individual fee and a service provider fee? 
    13. Should RID Certification be a requirement in the law? Especially with the whole NIC scandal, do people trust the RID Certification? What happens in 15 years when there could be a new certifying body in town, will the law still be valid? Changing a law is tougher than creating one. What if Maryland comes up with their own screening, is that included in the laws? Will it be transferable to the other states.
    14. What about if you work in five states – will you have to pay five different fees for five different licenses?
    15. Will there be exceptions for educational interpreters? In PA, they initially included educational interpreters, then the school districts lobbied to remove them citing lack of resources and guess what - they were excluded. Therefore perpetuating sub-par skills in the K-12 environment. How do we approach it in our area?
    16. US Federal Government is excluded from most laws. So, most of DC wouldn't be affected anyway. BUT - that could change in the future.
    17. What about independent interpreters that own their own LLCs or corporations - but they only employ themselves. Are they considered an individual or a provider? both?
    18. David Nelson, from DCAD is a supporter of licensure since his constituents are ready for a change. How can we best support DCAD while asserting ourselves?
    19. What about students and internships, will there be allowances for that? Provisional licenses? What are the requirements for that? 
    20. I am not against licensure, but I really want a seat at that table to discuss our perspective. Thank you to Andrea and Bethany for your hard work. Please keep us posted on upcoming meetings and other events so that I can attend.


Are you experiencing problems with this website? Send your feedback to communication@pcrid.org. Thank you!

© Copyright PCRID. All rights reserved.

PCRID is a 501c3 non-profit organization. 

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software