Translation and language services information

Translation and language services information

We are committed to ensuring our services are accessible to those who use them, both for colleagues and service users and residents.

We provide a wide range of services such as Adult Social Care, community, and engagement teams, digital and IT, customer services, communications, highways, waste and recycling, transport and many more, where it is important our messages and communications reach people and can be understood clearly.

Being able to understand our communications is paramount for colleagues and residents to be able to thrive in ��ϲ��ͼ�� and feel engaged with us and empowered to make choices.

Especially important is the ability to contact us, communicate and participate - this could be through providing information in alternative formats, or a language other than English. We are able to support information being translated, interpretation services etc where a specific language (or multiple languages) is needed to fulfil the project effectively and communicate with the audience or participants. There are various times when this may be required.

Suppliers

The external supplier(s) we currently use to deliver our interpreting and translation services are Clear Voice, the Royal Association for Deaf People, and Supreme Linguistic Services LTD T/A Premium Linguistic Services. We do not hold the information about what languages our suppliers are not able to supply.

Spend

For the last 6 financial years the organisation has spent the following on professional translation or interpreting services:

Financial year	Spend
2018 to 2019	£65,964
2019 to 2020	£79,578
2020 to 2021	£67,914
2021 to 2022	£84,163
2022 to 2023	£123,738
2023 to 2024	£196,836

Interpreting services are funded from various budgets within the organisation.

Fees

We are unable to provide an approximate fee or interpreting session for:

in-person or face to face interpreting
telephone interpreting
video interpreting

As this is commercially sensitive information that is exempt from being released under Section 43(2) Commercial Interests of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Under the public interest test we have considered the following arguments:

For:

transparency in the accountability of public funds
public money is being used effectively, and that departments are getting value for money when purchasing goods and services

Against:

disclosure would prejudice the suppliers quoted commercial position by giving competitors an unfair advantage when bidding for future contracts
disclosure would harm the working relationship with the quoted suppliers and undermine the effectiveness of the contract

We therefore concluded that the arguments against disclosure outweighed those in favour.

Machine translation

We do not use machine translation in our organisation and we do not have an established line of accountability in the event of negative outcomes that may arise from the use of machine translation.

As an organisation we do not follow a formal policy approving, prohibiting or regulating the use of machine translation tools

We have not carried out a risk assessment of possible consequences, for our organisation and/or for the people the organisation serves, from the use of machine translation.

������ϲ�����ͼ��