{ Remote Interpreting RI may be used in place of on-site interpreting whenever the quality of interpretation will not be compromised. Due process requires the courts to ensure LEP litigants are able to fully participate in the proceedings and that LEP individuals are afforded meaningful access. If it is determined that using RI would negatively impact access for any reason, on-site interpreting should always be used instead.* *CLAC Remote Interpreting Guide and Best Practices

Telephone

Specialized Telephone Equipment

Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP)

Video Conference Video Remote Interpreting

SKYPE and Other Web-Based Applications

RI May Be Appropriate When: ○ No certified or otherwise qualified interpreter is available in person ○ Proceedings are routine matters expected to last no more than minutes ○ It is more fiscally responsible to use remote interpreting than an on-site interpreter ○ The person in need of an interpreter speaks a language of limited diffusion ○ A local interpreter discloses a conflict of interest ○ Interpreting assistance is needed outside the courtroom

RI Is Not Appropriate When: ○ A certified or otherwise qualified interpreter is close-by to provide on-site interpreting ○ The proceedings last longer than minutes ○ The proceedings involve many participants or there is more than one language needed ○ Communication is difficult to establish adequately ○ Emotionally charged or contentious testimony is anticipated