Language access

Language Program Assessment

Identify Key Languages

Identify three to five languages (other than English) that the people in your program primarily speak. Although these languages may overlap with those you flagged in Step 1, don’t assume that will be true. If the number of LEP (“limited-English-proficient”) survivors in your program doesn’t reflect your community’s demographics, there may be barriers blocking people’s access—for example, they may not know your program exists or they may assume it isn’t accessible to them.

Review Your Program’s Demographic Data

Check which LEP survivors have contacted your organization and how often. Pull figures from every corner of the program—hotline, shelter, support groups, outreach, community-engagement events, and any advocates who work double duty with systems, community, and community-based advocacy efforts.

Rank the Languages

List the languages spoken by survivors who use these services.

Rank them from most to least common. (Example: last year 1,200 Korean speakers vs. 950 Cantonese speakers—Korean goes first.)

Enter those rankings in the Language Access Plan Template, Section 1B: Language-Access Needs.

Compare With Community Data

Do you offer services in every language spoken in your community? If not, those missing languages need coverage.

Are language groups served in the same proportion as they exist locally? If your in-program rankings don’t mirror community rankings, those gaps spotlight languages needing better access.

Dig Deeper into LEP Access

Ask: Are LEP survivors tapping the full range of services, or are they over-represented in outreach yet under-represented on the hotline and in shelters? Pinpoint areas running smoothly and areas that need triage; surface practices worth scaling across the board.

Consult Your Staff

Talk candidly with staff about who’s accessing services, what language options they truly have, and how those options shape survivor decisions and safety. Frame it as an organization-capacity check, not a staff performance review.

Why This Matters

This step tells you who IS and who IS NOT using your services—and why. Use the findings (and your Language Access Plan) as relationship-building tools with under-served community segments.

Monitor & Evaluate Interpreter and Translator Services

Ethics and Confidentiality. Do your interpreters/translators respect professional ethics and confidentiality, and are they trained on sexual- and domestic-violence issues?

If they belong to professional associations (e.g., American Translators Association, National Association of Judicial Interpreters & Translators), request their code of ethics and confidentiality forms.

If not, draft your own ethics and confidentiality forms with community allies to set shared standards.

Sample Interview Questions for prospective interpreters

Interpreter Codes of Ethics (collect or provide)

Model Confidentiality Form for interpreters

Pages 6–8 of the referenced Alliance report outline the process for developing translated materials.

Is Your Staff Interpreter-Ready?

Provide simple tips for working with interpreters.

Pages 77–80 of the Resource Guide for Advocates and Attorneys on Interpretation Services for Victims of Domestic Violence deliver an excellent tip sheet.

Bilingual Staff & Volunteers — Recruit | Train | Retain

Evaluate bilingual staff/volunteer language skills to keep service quality high and support ongoing professional development. The Asian & Pacific Islander Institute on Domestic Violence created the F.A.N.S. Checklist (Fluency, Accuracy, Neutrality, Safety)—a solid self-assessment tool for bilingual advocates.

Your program may need clear policies on when and how advocates should (or should not) interpret for outside organizations.

The F.A.N.S. Checklist helps build those policies, guides advocates’ responses to interpretation requests, and equips them to explain to survivors the difference between an advocate’s role and an interpreter’s role—so survivors can make fully informed choices.

Use it in training and supervision for advocates likely to be asked to interpret elsewhere.

Program Self-Assessment

See the Self-Assessment Example (pages 9–14) in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Language Access Guide for a ready-made framework.