Attachment 1 - PWS LEP Final.pdf

Serving SNAP Applicants and Participants with Limited English Proficiency

1.0 Overview

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 at 7 CFR 151 prohibits entities that receive federal financial assistance2 (e.g. State SNAP agencies) from discriminating against or otherwise excluding individuals on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any of their programs or activities. To avoid discrimination on the basis of national origin, entities that receive federal financial assistance must take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to their programs and activities for individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP).3 Meaningful access generally, refers to the provision of reasonable language assistance services that enable LEP persons to have substantially equal participation in and access to the benefits of a federal financial assistance program or activity. These services are meaningful when they are “provided at a time and place that avoids the effective denial of the service, benefit, or right at issue or the imposition of an undue burden on or delay in important rights, benefits, or services to the LEP person.”4

Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency” (August 11, 2000) (“Executive Order”) requires federal agencies to examine the services they provide, to identify any need for services to those with LEP, and to develop and implement a system to provide language assistance services for LEP persons. The Executive Order also requires federal agencies to ensure that entities receiving federal financial assistance provide meaningful access to their programs and activities for LEP persons. To this end, the United States Department of

1 Title VI Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1964 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. (justice.gov) 2 7 CFR 15.2(g) Federal financial assistance or financial assistance includes (1) grants and loans of Federal funds, (2) the grant or donation of Federal property and interests in property, (3) the detail of Federal personnel, (4) the sale and lease of, and the permission to use (on other than a casual or transient basis), Federal property or any interest in such property or the furnishing of services without consideration or at a nominal consideration, or at a consideration which is reduced for the purpose of assisting the recipient, or in recognition of the public interest to be served by such sale, lease or furnishing of services to the recipient, and (5) any Federal agreement, arrangement, or other contract which has as one of its purposes the provision of assistance.

3 USDA Final Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Persons With Limited English Proficiency (79 Fed. Reg. No, 229, Friday, November 28, 2014 [p. 70771 – 70784] (“USDA LEP Guidance”) , p. 70772 4 U.S Department of Justice, Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons, 67 Fed. Reg. 41,455, 41,457 (June 18, 2002) (DOJ LEP Guidance), p. 41461.

Attachment 1 https://www.justice.gov/crt/executive-order-13166 https://www.justice.gov/crt/executive-order-13166 https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI-Overview https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Part-15 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=6ebf73c0631ebb407a3fcfae7a2fb93b&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=1434272855d7f6460973db11e8c4e18f&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=6ebf73c0631ebb407a3fcfae7a2fb93b&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=353bd98ed1c613732d2a01a203e49ff7&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=7aea47d187fbc9aa63fe1e7252f73dd0&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=353bd98ed1c613732d2a01a203e49ff7&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=76adcb431b80b805f476a95e2cc814c6&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=d58026fd87a0a669d7e2b88068b37613&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=353bd98ed1c613732d2a01a203e49ff7&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=7aea47d187fbc9aa63fe1e7252f73dd0&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=76adcb431b80b805f476a95e2cc814c6&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=d58026fd87a0a669d7e2b88068b37613&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=9010e4625841e6d43a60f84d0252d930&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:7:Subtitle:A:Part:15:Subpart:A:15.2 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/28/2014-27960/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-the-title-vi-prohibition-against https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/28/2014-27960/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-the-title-vi-prohibition-against https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/28/2014-27960/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-the-title-vi-prohibition-against https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/28/2014-27960/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-the-title-vi-prohibition-against https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2002/06/18/02-15207/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-title-vi-prohibition-against-national https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2002/06/18/02-15207/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-title-vi-prohibition-against-national https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2002/06/18/02-15207/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-title-vi-prohibition-against-national

Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), seeks to understand how well State agencies understand language access regulations and guidance, how well they fulfill their requirements, and what types of assistance States agencies need from the Federal government to effectively implement language access policies, plans, and procedures that meet federal language access requirements.

This study consists of three components, two of which are required, and one of which will be an option based upon availability of funding. First, the Contractor shall survey all 53 State Agencies5 to identify their language access policies, plans and procedures for SNAP, including SNAP Employment and Training (SNAP E&T), SNAP Education (SNAP-Ed), and Disaster SNAP (D-SNAP). The Contractor shall determine if these language access policies, plans and procedures contain the basic elements of an effective language access strategy as described in the USDA Final Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Persons With Limited English Proficiency (“USDA LEP Guidance”). The Contractor shall determine how these language access policies, plans and procedures are implemented; how employees are trained on these policies; and, how the language access policies, plans and procedures are communicated to the public, applicants and participants.

The Contractor shall also determine how the State agency monitors the effectiveness of its language access policies, plans and procedures.

Second, the Contractor shall conduct interviews with the nutrition assistance program (NAP) staff in Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to document the same information collected from the States in the first component.

As the option, third, the Contractor shall conduct case studies in four (4) of the States that completed the survey. This shall include interviews with staff at three (3) local offices in each of the States to determine if local agencies and subrecipients of the federal financial assistance are implementing the State agency’s language access policies and/or if they maintain separate local language access policies, plans and procedures that are consistent with the State agency’s policy, plan and procedures.

2.0 Background

While English is the predominant language in the United States, almost 22 percent of the US population speaks a language other than English at home.

5 The 53 State SNAP agencies include those in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the United States Virgin Islands, and Guam.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/28/2014-27960/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-the-title-vi-prohibition-against https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/28/2014-27960/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-the-title-vi-prohibition-against https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/28/2014-27960/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-the-title-vi-prohibition-against https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/28/2014-27960/guidance-to-federal-financial-assistance-recipients-regarding-the-title-vi-prohibition-against

Though most of the US population speak English very well, over eight percent of the population speaks English less than very well6. However, the portion of Americans who have limited English proficiency (LEP) is not distributed evenly over the country. Instead, it is concentrated in the Southwest, the West Coast, and around major cities throughout the U.S.7 The Department of Justice provides the public with a language mapping tool that shows LEP populations by State and county at 2015 Language Map App | LEP and 2015 Language Map App Accessible Version | LEP.

Language Access, the SNAP Federal-State Agreement, and Assurance of Nondiscrimination

Federal regulations require every application for federal financial assistance to include an assurance of nondiscrimination statement.8 This includes agreements between the USDA and the State agency, the State agency and its local agencies, the local agency and its subrecipients. The Civil Rights requirements within the current USDA FNS Federal-State Agreement for SNAP states in part:

The State agrees to: 1. Administer the program in accordance with the provisions contained in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended, and in the manner prescribed by regulations issued pursuant to the Act; and to implement the FNS-approved State Plan of Operation.

2.Comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88-352), section 11(c) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (Pub. L. 94-135) and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Pub. L. 93-112, sec. 504) and all requirements imposed by the regulations issued pursuant to these Acts by the Department of Agriculture to the effect that, no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of sex, race, color, age, political belief, religion, handicap, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subject to discrimination under SNAP.

Addendum

6 American Community Survey 2019 5-year average summarized in: Why We Ask About...Language Spokent at Home | American Community Survey | US Census Bureau [sic]: Retrieved March 31, 2021.

7 People That Speak English Less Than "Very Well" in the United States (census.gov) 8 7 CFR 15.4 and SSECTION 272.2 https://www.lep.gov/maps/lma2015/Final https://www.lep.gov/maps/lma2015/Final https://www.lep.gov/maps/lma2015/Final_508 https://www.census.gov/acs/www/about/why-we-ask-each-question/language/ https://www.census.gov/acs/www/about/why-we-ask-each-question/language/ https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/interactive/people-that-speak-english-less-than-very-well.html https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Section-15.4 https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Section-272.2

Clarification of SNAP Civil Rights Requirements - Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP),” and Title II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act

This addendum clarifies core civil rights requirements to ensure meaningful access to programs, services, and information for persons with LEP and persons with disabilities in accordance with Federal law, regulations and current guidance from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Meaningful Access for LEP Individuals State agencies that participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) must take reasonable steps to ensure that LEP persons have meaningful access to programs, services, and benefits. This includes the requirement to provide bilingual program information and certification materials and interpretation services to single-language minorities in certain project areas9. SNAP State agencies that do not provide meaningful access for LEP individuals risk violating prohibitions against discrimination based on National Origin in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), and SNAP program regulations.

Federal LEP regulations and guidance include:

• SNAP regulations provided by 7 CFR Part 272.4(b), “Bilingual requirements”;

• Executive Order 13166 of August 11, 2000, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency,” reprinted in 65 FR 50121, 50122 (August 16, 2000);

• DOJ policy guidance titled, “Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons,” published in 67 FR 41455, 41457 (June 18, 2002); and

• USDA policy guidance titled, “Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient

9 Project area is a county or similar political subdivision designated by a State as the administrative unit for program operations. Upon prior FNS approval, a city, Indian reservation, welfare district, or any other entity with clearly defined geographic boundaries, or any combination of such entities, may be designated as a project area, or a State as a whole may be designated as a single project area.

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.cornell.edu%2Fdefinitions%2Findex.php%3Fwidth%3D840%26height%3D800%26iframe%3Dtrue%26def_id%3D847c0d88eae5bebca426d953e0c81eee%26term_occur%3D999%26term_src%3DTitle%3A7%3ASubtitle%3AB%3AChapter%3AII%3ASubchapter%3AC%3APart%3A271%3A271.2&data=04%7C01%7C%7C65d486ee643649f242fc08d908bb18e8%7Ced5b36e701ee4ebc867ee03cfa0d4697%7C0%7C0%7C637550421927443581%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=1VEP4wjkc%2Fix5P3JCe70xNinYmRA7Gk3%2FEXoO6B90jk%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.cornell.edu%2Fdefinitions%2Findex.php%3Fwidth%3D840%26height%3D800%26iframe%3Dtrue%26def_id%3Df5303ab655701703470eb985a44aa754%26term_occur%3D999%26term_src%3DTitle%3A7%3ASubtitle%3AB%3AChapter%3AII%3ASubchapter%3AC%3APart%3A271%3A271.2&data=04%7C01%7C%7C65d486ee643649f242fc08d908bb18e8%7Ced5b36e701ee4ebc867ee03cfa0d4697%7C0%7C0%7C637550421927453531%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=tyl%2Ffb8IT4JJ%2F9WFjdVJofmjQf0eHgzgtWSs9iPO65g%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.cornell.edu%2Fdefinitions%2Findex.php%3Fwidth%3D840%26height%3D800%26iframe%3Dtrue%26def_id%3Dbee6f65b6cdddca0a26882b23d6d1324%26term_occur%3D999%26term_src%3DTitle%3A7%3ASubtitle%3AB%3AChapter%3AII%3ASubchapter%3AC%3APart%3A271%3A271.2&data=04%7C01%7C%7C65d486ee643649f242fc08d908bb18e8%7Ced5b36e701ee4ebc867ee03cfa0d4697%7C0%7C0%7C637550421927453531%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=B14DikS61lQPfYDbN%2FHvOwOavGgOSnGUlEoIUNTTR6s%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.cornell.edu%2Fdefinitions%2Findex.php%3Fwidth%3D840%26height%3D800%26iframe%3Dtrue%26def_id%3Da4868ebebc7da271ed5143a24bcd16f7%26term_occur%3D999%26term_src%3DTitle%3A7%3ASubtitle%3AB%3AChapter%3AII%3ASubchapter%3AC%3APart%3A271%3A271.2&data=04%7C01%7C%7C65d486ee643649f242fc08d908bb18e8%7Ced5b36e701ee4ebc867ee03cfa0d4697%7C0%7C0%7C637550421927453531%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=NdiTc0kekoWO2Li6ChjqDNHYp3k%2BaF6q0zYDon%2BYzfQ%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.cornell.edu%2Fdefinitions%2Findex.php%3Fwidth%3D840%26height%3D800%26iframe%3Dtrue%26def_id%3D847c0d88eae5bebca426d953e0c81eee%26term_occur%3D999%26term_src%3DTitle%3A7%3ASubtitle%3AB%3AChapter%3AII%3ASubchapter%3AC%3APart%3A271%3A271.2&data=04%7C01%7C%7C65d486ee643649f242fc08d908bb18e8%7Ced5b36e701ee4ebc867ee03cfa0d4697%7C0%7C0%7C637550421927463491%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=zh2ttqXwAI0RYfRRMA27hxTiHajnkfK1tIOldXEmDek%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.cornell.edu%2Fdefinitions%2Findex.php%3Fwidth%3D840%26height%3D800%26iframe%3Dtrue%26def_id%3Da4868ebebc7da271ed5143a24bcd16f7%26term_occur%3D999%26term_src%3DTitle%3A7%3ASubtitle%3AB%3AChapter%3AII%3ASubchapter%3AC%3APart%3A271%3A271.2&data=04%7C01%7C%7C65d486ee643649f242fc08d908bb18e8%7Ced5b36e701ee4ebc867ee03cfa0d4697%7C0%7C0%7C637550421927463491%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=X%2ByybwFPLlU4cRTS7cIAEq51I4cQFwXG6atehoXPeHw%3D&reserved=0

Persons”, published in 79 FR 70771 - 70784 (November 28, 2014).

Four Factor Analysis for Assessing LEP Needs To be in compliance, the Title VI guidance provided by DOJ and USDA instructs State Agencies to assess the LEP needs of the population served and determine the LEP services required by balancing four factors:

1. The number or proportion of LEP persons eligible to be served or likely to be encountered within the area serviced by the recipient;

2. The frequency with which LEP individuals come in contact with the program;

3. The nature and importance of the program, activity, or service to people’s lives; and

4. The resources available to the recipient and costs.

SNAP State Agencies must also comply with the specific requirements established by 7 CFR Part 272.4(b) and should include these obligations in the LEP assessment.

The complete Federal-State Agreement is within the FY2020 SNAP State Plan of Operations Guide. The FNS Civil Rights Division (FNS CRD), FNS Regional Office SNAP staff and State agencies are responsible for ensuring that the appropriate Civil Rights assurance of nondiscrimination statement appears in all agreements for SNAP.

All civil rights regulations and federal LEP guidance apply to all aspects of SNAP. Therefore, State agencies, local agencies and subrecipients must ensure meaningful access to SNAP, SNAP E&T, SNAP-Ed and D-SNAP services and activities through the provision of appropriate notices about the availability of language assistance services and through the provision qualified, competent language assistance services at no cost to the individual with LEP. The same civil rights regulations and guidance apply to the NAPs in Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

For example, qualified interpreters10 must be used when communicating information regarding SNAP orally to individuals with LEP. Interpretation

10 A qualified interpreter is a highly trained individual who mediates spoken communication between people speaking different languages without adding, omitting, or distorting services may be needed for interactions such as interviews, appeals hearings (e.g. administrative disqualification hearings), as well as when providing SNAP-Ed, SNAP E&T services and D-SNAP services. State agencies, local agencies and subrecipients should not plan to rely on a SNAP applicant or recipient’s family and friends or other informal interpreters to provide meaningful access to SNAP. Reliance on children is especially discouraged unless there is an extreme emergency and no preferable qualified interpreters are available.11

State agencies, local agencies and subrecipients must utilize qualified translators12 to translate vital information13 regarding SNAP into frequently encountered LEP languages. This includes information in printed form, on websites, online applications, account management platforms, and more.

Some materials that may require translation include applications, program information materials (e.g., EBT training materials, fraud prevention materials, etc.), program violation notifications, fair hearing notices, and SNAP E&T, SNAP-Ed and D-SNAP materials.

State SNAP agencies may not just passively support LEP individuals who seek to apply for benefits. Instead, State agencies are required to conduct any outreach or information sharing they do for the program in general to LEP communities in languages that communities understand. This includes posting civil rights notifications in SNAP offices in the languages most frequently encountered in the areas supported by those offices.

Civil Rights and SNAP

In addition to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its implementing regulations for the USDA at 7 CFR 15, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin, the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex, meaning or editorializing. A qualified interpreter is competent to provide interpretation services at a level of fluency, comprehension, impartiality, and confidentiality appropriate to the specific nature, type, and purpose of the information at issue. Bilingual staff who serve as interpreters should also be competent in the skill of interpreting.

11 USDA LEP Guidance, p. 70779 – 70781.

12 A qualified translator A qualified, competent translator is a highly trained individual who is able to render text from a source language into a target language while preserving meaning and adhering to generally accepted translator ethics and principles, including confidentiality.

13 Vital information or vital documents contain information that is critical for accessing a component’s program or activities or is required by law. Whether or not a document (or the information it solicits) is ‘‘vital’’ may depend upon the importance of the program or activity, information, encounter, service, or benefit involved, and the consequence to the LEP person if the information in question is not provided accurately or in a timely manner.

https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Part-15 disability, religious creed and political beliefs.14 The implementing regulations for this statute establish bilingual requirements at 7 CFR 272.4(b) et seq. for assisting persons with LEP.15 These SNAP bilingual regulations coupled with the USDA LEP Guidance describe the reasonable steps recipients, which in this context refers to State Agencies and their subrecipients, should take to ensure meaningful access to SNAP for individuals with LEP. Reasonable steps include, but are not limited to the following:

• Assessing language assistance obligations using the USDA’s four-factor analysis (described above)

• Providing notice to individuals with LEP regarding the availability of free language assistance services

• Identifying persons with LEP and their language assistance needs

• Providing qualified, competent language assistance services

• Translating vital documents and information

• Ensuring access to website, online automation systems and digital platforms and telephone customer service lines used for SNAP

• Recording and tracking primary language spoken and language assistance provided at each contact with a LEP person

• Training staff on their language access obligations

• Involving community in the development of language access policies, plans and procedures

• Monitoring the effectiveness of the recipient’s language access policy, plan, and procedures

Additionally, the USDA’s Equal Opportunity Public Notification Policy16 necessitates that individuals participating in any USDA program or wishing to participate in a program be notified of these rights in a language they understand.

The FNS Instruction 113-1: Civil Rights Compliance and Enforcement – Nutrition Programs and Activities (“FNS Instruction 113-1”) further explains State agency and subrecipient requirements to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access for individuals and emphasizes that failure to do

14 The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly the Food Stamp Program (7 USC § 2011 et seq.)

15 7 CFR § 272.4 Program administration and personnel requirements - Code of Federal Regulations (ecfr.io)

16 DR 4300-003 Equal Opportunity Public Notification Policy (usda.gov) (October 17, 2019).

https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Section-272.4 https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Section-272.4 https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/food-and-nutrition-act-2008-enacted-december-20-2018 https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/food-and-nutrition-act-2008-enacted-december-20-2018 https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Section-272.4 https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Section-272.4 https://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/20191017_DR4300-003_EqualOppPublicNotice_Final_0.pdf so may be discrimination based on national origin discrimination.17 The FNS Instruction 113-1 also describes the USDA’s four factor analysis to determine the extent of a recipient’s obligation to provide language assistance services. This instruction cites the bilingual regulations for SNAP and states that these requirements apply to “all [SNAP] activities including, but not limited to, work requirements, Electronic Benefit Transfer, outreach, and nutrition education.”18

State agencies, local agencies and subrecipients are required to notify SNAP applicants in a language that they can understand that they have the right to file a discrimination complaint with the USDA if they believe either has failed to ensure meaningful access for individuals with LEP.19 When State agencies and their subrecipients receive a civil rights complaint involving language access and national origin discrimination, they must follow a FNS CRD-approved complaints processing procedure, which could involve referral of the complaint to FNS CRD for investigation or require the State agency to secure FNS CRD’s review and concurrence with the State agency’s investigation prior to issuing a determination letter.

USDA’s Title VI regulations require USDA agencies to review nondiscrimination activities of their federal financial assistance recipients to determine if they are complying with the civil rights nondiscrimination requirements.20 FNS CRD reviews and approves all State agency language access policies, plans and procedures, as well as State agency complaints processing procedures during FNS CRD’s complaint investigations and routine and special compliance reviews. State agencies may also face civil rights compliance reviews as part of a more general management evaluation or during the pre-award process.21 State agencies are required to review their subrecipient agencies in accordance with FNS Instruction 113-1.22

17 FNS Instruction 113-1: Civil Rights Compliance and Enforcement – Nutrition Programs and Activities, Sections VII, Limited English Proficiency (November 8, 2015).

18 A(H) in the FNS Instruction 113-1.; see also, 7 CFR 272.4(b) 19 DR 4300-003 Equal Opportunity Public Notification Policy (usda.gov) (October 17, 2019), FNS Instruction 113-1: Civil Rights Compliance and Enforcement – Nutrition Programs and Activities, Sections XV (November 8, 2005), and Program Discrimination Complaint Filing | USDA

20 7 CFR 15.5

21 FNS Instruction 113-1: Civil Rights Compliance and Enforcement – Nutrition Programs and Activities, Sections VIII 22 Ibid https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/20191017_DR4300-003_EqualOppPublicNotice_Final_0.pdf https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Section-15.5 https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/113-1.pdf

FNS CRD’s pre-award compliance review 23, a routine or special civil rights compliance reviews or FNS SNAP’s management evaluations should determine whether State agencies, local agencies and subrecipients take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to SNAP for individuals with LEP. If FNS determines a State agency has not complied with their language access requirements, FNS informs the state agency of any insufficiencies and the actions required to correct them in a timely manner. If a State agency fails or threatens to fail to voluntarily comply with civil rights requirements, and if noncompliance cannot be corrected by informal means, USDA implements an enforcement process that could result in suspension or termination of federal financial assistance.24

LEP throughout the United States

The most commonly spoken language among LEP Americans is Spanish at

5.3 percent of the population25. This is followed by Asian/Pacific Islander languages at 1.6 percent and other Indo-European languages at 1.1 percent.

However, the LEP Americans are not evenly distributed throughout the country. For instance, 17.8 percent of California residents speak English less than very well, while only 0.7 percent of West Virginia residents speak English less than very well26. The only territory for which the Census Bureau provides estimates of language proficiency is Puerto Rico, where 76.6 percent of residents speak English less than very well.

Furthermore, the proportion of LEP individuals is concentrated in certain areas of States. For instance, while the proportion of residents of Minnesota speak English less than very well is 4.7 percent, for the city of Minneapolis it is almost twice as high at 8.3 percent27.

23 A Preapproval/Pre-award Compliance Review is desk or onsite compliance review of specific civil rights information submitted by a State agency, local agency, or other subrecipient applicant agency in the application for Federal financial assistance. The review and approval of the information must take place before the application is approved for program operation. A Post-approval/Post-award Compliance Review is A civil rights review (desk or onsite) that is conducted after an entity has been authorized to receive Federal financial assistance from FNS to determine civil rights compliance. The review may be done as a routine part of the program compliance reviews or management evaluations. The review may also be a special in-depth review as determined by civil rights concerns.

24 7 CFR 15.8

25 United States Census Bureau 2019 5-year average 26 Ibid 27 Ibid https://ecfr.io/Title-7/Section-15.8

Spanish is the most commonly spoken second language in almost all States28. However, there are exceptions such as Alaska where Aleut/Eskimo has the same percent of speakers as Spanish, and Hawaii and Maine where the most commonly spoken languages besides English are Filipino/Tagalog and French, respectively.

Taken as a whole, this shows why States must determine the language services they need to provide on a local basis. Translation of documents and readily available interpretation services for one language may be of critical importance in one part of a State but may be of less relevance in another part.

3.0 Scope of Work

The Contractor shall provide all management, supervision, labor and equipment, planning, scheduling, and coordinating to ensure effective performance of all services and/or supplies as described in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

The study shall include two components. A third component is an option that will be awarded based upon the availability of funds.

Component 1: Examination of State LEP Policies, Plans and Procedures for

SNAP

The Contractor shall conduct a research study to detail the language access policies, plans and procedures used by each State agency, how these policies, plans, and procedures are created, how they are communicated to the SNAP population, how SNAP frontline workers are trained about their language access obligations, how well State agencies understand Title VI and the federal language access regulations and guidance, how LEP related civil rights complaints are addressed, and what States believe they need to properly implement effective language access policies, plans, and procedures. This shall include a review of language access policies and a survey of all 53 State agencies that administer SNAP with follow-up calls to clarify any unclear results. The Contractor shall conduct quantitative and qualitative analyses, where appropriate, to produce a publicly releasable final report presenting the results of the survey.

Methodology: Component 1

28 Calculated from United States Census Bureau, Detailed Languages Spoken at Home and Ability to Speak English for the Population 5 Years and Over: 2009-2013.

The study shall involve a mixed method design that shall include the following elements:

1. A review of the language landscape within all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Guam, and the United States Virgin Islands, including the languages most commonly spoken and the concentration of LEP speakers.

2. A review of State documents (hardcopy and electronic), including websites from all 53 State Agencies regarding their LEP policies, plans and procedures, including those provided to the public and those that are used for training and other internal purposes. This includes but is not limited to applicable State statutes and regulations, policies, standard operating procedures, training materials, SNAP E&T documents, SNAP-Ed documents, D-SNAP documents, and other written guidance for frontline employees.

3. A review of the written and electronic information and messaging for SNAP customers, including on websites, online applications and account management platforms, i.e. EBT platforms, for all 53 State Agencies. This includes examining the language options and the translated information to ensure program information is translated by qualified translators rather than machine translation software.

4. A review of voicemail options on customer service lines used for SNAP to determine if LEP persons, including non-Spanish speaking LEP persons, have meaningful access to customer service assistance to same extent as English speakers.

5. A web-based survey of all 53 State Agencies for data to thoroughly address all nine (9) research objectives and associated research questions (see Section 4).

6. Documentation of the types of language assistance services each State agency utilizes to ensure meaningful access and a determination as to whether these services include qualified and competent interpreters and translators for staff use.

7. When necessary, follow-up phone calls with State agencies to clarify answers from the surveys and address questions brought up by document reviews.

Component 2: Examination of LEP Policy, Plans, and Procedures in Nutrition Assistance Programs (NAPs) in three Territories

The Contractor shall conduct a research study to detail the language access policies, plans and procedures used by the three block grant nutrition programs (i.e., Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands), how the language access policies, plans and procedures are created, how they are communicated to the NAP population, how NAP frontline workers are trained about their language access obligations, how well the agencies that operate the programs understand Title VI the federal LEP regulations and guidance, and what the program agencies believe they need to properly implement effective language access policies, plans and procedures. This shall include a review of all policies, plans, procedures and operations documents for, and interviews with, senior policy and operations staff for the Puerto Rico Nutrition Assistance Program (PR-NAP), the American Samoa Nutrition Assistance Program (AS-NAP), and the Nutrition Assistance Program for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI-NAP). The Contractor shall conduct qualitative analyses and, where appropriate, quantitative analyses, and produce a publicly releasable final report.

Methodology: Component 2

The study shall involve qualitative methods that include:

1. A review of the language landscape in three U.S. Territories, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), including the languages most commonly spoken and concentration of LEP speakers.

2. A review of Government documents, including websites and other virtual documents regarding their LEP policies, plans, and procedures, including those provided to the public and those that are used for training and other internal purposes. This includes but is not limited to applicable statutes and regulations, policies, standard operating procedures, training materials, and other written guidance for frontline employees.

3. A review of the NAP information and application websites for the three territories including on websites, online applications, and account management platforms, i.e. EBT platforms. This includes examining the language options and the translated information to ensure program information is translated by qualified translators rather than machine translation software.

4. A review of voicemail options on customer service lines used for NAPs to determine if LEP persons, including non-Spanish speaking LEP persons, have meaningful access to customer service assistance to same extent as English speakers.

5. A pre-interview questionnaire that gathers basic information about the topics that will be covered in the interview in order to inform the specific questions that will be asked of the NAP personnel.

6. Interviews with appropriate NAP personnel in the three territories to collect information needed to comprehensively address all the objectives and research questions for Component 2 (see section 4).

See Option #1 section for component 3.

Constraints and Considerations

The Contractor shall provide in the study plan in their technical proposal a clearly enumerated description of what they perceive to be the constraints, considerations, and risks to meeting the study objectives and research questions and how they envision mitigating these constraints and considerations. Constraints and considerations that shall be addressed include, but are not limited to:

Component 1

• The Contractor shall indicate how they intend to recruit all 53 State SNAP agencies for participation in the survey and obtain their policy and guidance documents for review.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they will field the survey to SNAP directors in all 53 State SNAP agencies with the option for modules or sections of the survey to be delegated to other agency staff who may be better positioned to provide detailed information. FNS envisions a web-based survey with phone follow-up. (Contractors are encouraged to propose additional approaches for follow-up and survey completion.)

• The Contractor shall describe the process for reviewing survey responses for completeness and accuracy and plans for following up on missing or incomplete information.

• The Contractor shall indicate in the study plan the length of the survey data collection period, including the time they intend to have the web survey open and at what intervals and how they plan to follow-up with State Agencies on survey completion.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they plan to provide technical assistance with survey completion.

• The Contractor shall explain how they will ensure a 100 percent response rate.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they will ensure the integrity of data collected from respondents and secure storage of data.

• The contractor shall describe the process by which they will define language commonly spoken in a State versus those not commonly spoken in a State.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they will evaluate which data from the United States Census Bureau and other publicly available sources to identify the languages commonly used by LEP persons in each State and within specific areas in the State.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they intend to address language access in E&T as part of the survey.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they intend to address language in D-SNAP as part of the survey.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they intend to address language access in SNAP-Ed as part of the survey.

• The Contractor shall indicate whether survey data collection can be completed in sixteen (16) weeks. If contractor does not feel sixteen

(16) weeks is reasonable, they shall propose an alternative.

Component 2

• The Contractor shall indicate the languages in which they intend to conduct interviews with staff in Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and discuss their rationale for using those languages.

• The Contractor shall describe how they intend to conduct the interviews with staff at the three NAP agencies, including number and type of staff to be interviewed, qualifications of the interviewer(s) and whether interviews would be conducted virtually. FNS envisions the interviews will be conducted remotely with the assistance of trained local interviewers and that interviews will be recorded, translated as needed and all recorded interviews will be transcribed. The Contractor shall provide a strong justification if travel to one or more of the territories is warranted for data collection.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they will ensure the integrity of data collected from respondents and secure storage of data.

• The contractor shall describe the process by which they will define languages commonly spoken in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands versus those not commonly spoken in those territories.

• The Contractor shall indicate how they will evaluate which data from the United States Census Bureau and other publicly available sources will be used to identify languages common in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

• The Contractor shall indicate whether interviews can be completed in eight (8) weeks. Otherwise the Contractor shall propose a schedule based upon their specific methodology. For example, fielding a pre-interview (e.g., web-based, electronic) questionnaire tailored for each NAP Agency followed by phone interviews to clarify responses. The proposed methodology must produce the data needed to comprehensively address all the study objectives and research questions for this component (See Section 4).

See Option #1 section for Component 3 considerations and constraints

OMB Information Collection Request:

This study will require approval of an information collection request from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

• The Contractor shall allow at a minimum 52 weeks for OMB’s final approval from the date of the publication of the Federal Register 60-day Notice (FRN).

• The Contractor shall discuss how the project timeline would be flexible enough to accommodate an earlier approval date and how the timeline will align with other data collection and analysis activities.

• The Contractor shall discuss how they will approach unanticipated revisions if necessary (e.g., changes requested by USDA Office of the Chief Information Officer or OMB).

• The Contractor shall assume that the OMB package will need to be reviewed by the Office of Policy Support, FNS privacy officer, the SNAP office, the Civil Rights Division, and possibly other interested parties.

Any of the reviewers may make comments to the package.

• The Contractor shall assume that before the OMB package can be submitted, any instruments developed should be in near final status.

Screen shots of web surveys must be provided and translated documents if needed/ must be included in the original submission.

• The Contractor shall assume that changes may be necessary based upon public comment from the 60-day notice in the Federal Register, feedback from the USDA Office of the Chief Information Officer, or

OMB.

• The Contractor shall assume that findings from the pretest must be included in the first draft of the OMB package submitted to FNS for review.

• The Contractor shall assume that all approvals from Institutional Review Boards must be received before the package can be submitted to OMB.

4.0 Research Objectives

The Contractor shall address the following study objectives and research questions. Contractor may propose additional research questions under each objective:

Component 1: Examination of State LEP Policies for SNAP

Objective 1: Describe how each State agency makes decisions about addressing LEP regulations and policies and civil rights regulations and policies as related to LEP:

• How well do States understand the USDA and FNS LEP regulations and USDA LEP Guidance put forth from FNS?

• How well do States understand the federal civil rights statutes, regulations, and guidance that apply to language access for individuals with LEP?

• Do States have their own program or civil rights regulations or policies for working with LEP applicants/participants?

• How do States decide for which languages to provide translation services for?

• How do States decide for which languages to provide interpretation services for?

• What are the provisions for someone whose only proficiency is in a language not commonly used in the State?

• What provisions are made for languages that are mostly spoken instead of written?

• Is the State agency offering language assistance services as a result of a court decision, complaint investigation or compliance review?

Objective 2: Describe the LEP policy landscape in each State:

• What documents are translated and into which languages are they translated?

• What are the language options for websites, online applications and account management platforms?

• Are online services translated using a machine translation software or qualified human translators?

• How does a State agency determine what mix of languages services to provide?

• How does the State agency determine which written material (paper or electronic) will be translated?

• What process does the State agency use to determine whether its contracted language assistance services are qualified and competent?

• How does the State Agency ensure that changes made to English documents are simultaneously translated into frequently encountered languages?

• What LEP resources are available to help applicants/participants access online websites, portals or applications?

• How does the State agency, local agencies and subrecipients29 (e.g.

E&T providers) ensure LEP persons have meaningful access to telephone voice mail menus on customer service lines used for SNAP?

Are there Spanish and Other Language options on these lines?

29 Subrecipients are generally SNAP-Ed implementing agencies, E&T providers, and other community organizations that contract with the State agency to provide SNAP services.

• Does the SNAP agency utilize qualified translators to translate program information on digital services such as websites, online automated applications, EBT platforms, etc.?

• How does the SNAP agency determine whether the interpreters and translators used for SNAP services are qualified and competent to interpret or translate?

• If bilingual staff are used to interpret or to communicate in-person with LEP applicants and participants, how does the SNAP provider30 determine if they are qualified to do so?

• How does the State ensure translation accuracy, integrity, and cultural accuracy?

• For languages that might have regional variation (e.g., Puerto Rican Spanish vs. Mexican Spanish) does that State use multiple translations?

• How are language services provided in unexpected situations (e.g., benefit issuance system outage, running out of translated materials, applicants that enter the office and cannot communicate due to LEP)?

• What restrictions or limitations do SNAP providers have on the use of family, friends, and children as interpreters?

• How frequently do SNAP providers use family, friends, and children as interpreters?

• Does the State agency…