Consequences and Methods of LEP Enforcement
Download
1 / 44

Consequences and Methods of LEP Enforcement - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 184 Views
  • Uploaded on

Consequences and Methods of LEP Enforcement. Prepared for the Ohio Statewide Civil Rights Conference June 7-8, 2006. Outline. Sources of Guidance What are LEP requirements and where can I find them? Enforcement Mechanisms Who can enforce LEP requirements and how can they do it? Remedies

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Consequences and Methods of LEP Enforcement' - lew


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Slide1 l.jpg

Consequences and Methods of LEP Enforcement

Prepared for the Ohio Statewide Civil Rights Conference

June 7-8, 2006


Outline l.jpg
Outline

Sources of Guidance

What are LEP requirements and where can I find them?

Enforcement Mechanisms

Who can enforce LEP requirements and how can they do it?

Remedies

What can happen if I violate LEP requirements?

Case Studies

Federal agency enforcement actions

Almendares v. Palmer

Recent enforcement actions by the State of Ohio


Sources of guidance l.jpg
Sources of Guidance

  • Federal law

    • 42 U.S.C. §2000d et seq. and45 C.F.R. Part 80

  • State law

    • Ohio Admin. Code §§5101:9-2-01; 5101:9-2-05

  • Case law

  • Department of Justice Legal Manual and policies

  • Executive Order 13,166

  • Non-regulatory guidance

    • Often agency-specific. See, e.g., 68 Fed. Reg. 47311

  • Web-based agency updates

    • FAQs, letters, multi-language pamphlets, etc.


Enforcement mechanisms l.jpg
Enforcement Mechanisms

  • Lawsuits by individuals

    • Class actions and private actions

  • Complaints by individuals

    • Complaints to ODJFS or federal OCR

      • ACLU’s Rhode Island complaint letter to DOJ

  • Federal agency action

    • Lawsuits, informal action, other

  • Action by the State of Ohio

    • Investigation, funding termination, corrective action plans



Federal remedies l.jpg
Federal Remedies

  • Informal action (e.g., 45 C.F.R. §80.8)

    • Preferred mechanism in many cases (45 C.F.R. §80.8(c))

  • Federal corrective action plan

  • Federal funding termination

    • Federal government can terminate funding for actual or threatened non-compliance (e.g., 45 C.F.R. §80.8(a))

    • Hearing rights


Slide7 l.jpg

Complaint

OCR Performs Own

Review

Yes

Valid?

Yes

Problem?

OCR Does Not Review

No

OCR Issues Letter of

Findings

OCR Sends Letter To

Entity

OCR Requests Data

OCR and Entity Sign

Negotiated Agreement

No

More

Info?

OCR Monitors CAP

Implementation

Yes

OCR Site Visit, Info Req.

No

CAP

Implemented?

Case Closed

Source:

2001 GAO Report


Federal ocr problems reported l.jpg
Federal OCR Problems Reported

Source:

2001 GAO Report


Praise for ocr l.jpg
Praise For OCR

Source:

2001 GAO Report


State remedies l.jpg
State Remedies

  • Informal compliance

  • State corrective action plan

  • Financial penalties for “responsible entities”

    • Impose liability for FFP disallowance

    • “Pass through” federal fines

    • Impose “administrative sanctions” issued by ODJFS

    • Take over, or contract for someone else to take over, responsible entity’s operations

    • Withhold funding

    • Ask Attorney General to bring mandamus action


Legal remedies l.jpg
Legal Remedies

  • Court can impose wide array of remedies

    • Court identifies wrongdoing

    • Damages

    • Injunction

    • Attorney fees

    • Court-appointed monitor

  • Parties can settle lawsuit

    • Usually involves attorney fees

    • Usually involves corrective action

    • Often involves participation of plaintiffs


Case studies l.jpg
Case Studies

Federal agency enforcement

Ohio enforcement actions

Almendares v. Palmer


Doj enforcement l.jpg
DOJ Enforcement

  • In 2005, Russian voters in Boston complained to DOJ about elections

  • DOJ observed 2005 special elections in Boston and interviewed voters and community leaders from Latino and Asian communities

  • Observers were also sent to Maple Heights, Ohio, in 2002

    • Outcome of observations unknown


Doj enforcement14 l.jpg
DOJ Enforcement

  • In July 2005, DOJ sued City of Boston for violating voting-rights of LEP populations

  • Part of nationwide voting rights investigation

  • Allegations:

    • No foreign language voting materials or assistance for LEP persons at polls

    • LEP persons treated “disrespectfully,” not allowed assistance by person of their choice, improperly influenced

    • Allegations centered around Asian and Spanish-speaking persons


Doj enforcement15 l.jpg
DOJ Enforcement

  • Legal bases

    • 42 U.S.C. §1973b(f)(2)No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote because he is a member of a language minority group.


Doj enforcement16 l.jpg
DOJ Enforcement

  • Legal bases

  • 42 U.S.C. §1973aa-1a

    • Before August 6, 2007, no covered State or political subdivision shall provide voting materials only in the English language.

    • States must provide voting materials in the “language of the applicable minority group” as well as in the English language.


Doj enforcement17 l.jpg
DOJ Enforcement

  • Remedies requested:

    • Declare Boston violated federal Voting Rights Act

    • Require Boston to provide assistance to Asian and Spanish-speaking persons during all phases of voting process

    • Require corrective action plan

    • Appoint federal monitors to oversee elections in Boston for next two years


Doj enforcement18 l.jpg
DOJ Enforcement

  • Settlement:

    • Provide voting and election information in Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese

    • Seek passage of legislation authorizing the use of multi-lingual ballots

    • Provide free Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese translators (over telephone and at polls)

    • Recruit Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese poll volunteers, election officers,

    • Create “City Elections Language Coordinator” and several other bilingual employees


Doj enforcement19 l.jpg
DOJ Enforcement

  • Settlement:

    • Create Mayor’s Advisory Task Force to “address concerns” of language-minority groups

    • Re-assess multi-language programs after each election

    • Maintain all records and allow DOJ access

    • Give DOJ advance notice of all polling locations

    • Provide and disseminate all foreign-language materials to the same extent as English-language materials


Dhhs enforcement l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • In 1999, DHHS’ Civil Rights Division received complaints from advocacy groups in New York City

  • Allegations

    • Medicaid beneficiaries told to bring own interpreters

    • Medicaid beneficiaries not provided interpreters

    • Allegations involved deaf persons as well as LEP persons


Dhhs enforcement21 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • Legal bases

    • Alleged violations of 45 C.F.R. §80.3

      • No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program to which this part applies.


Dhhs enforcement22 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • Legal bases

    • 45 C.F.R. §84.4

      • No qualified handicapped person shall, on the basis of handicap, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity which receives federal financial assistance.


Dhhs enforcement23 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • Legal bases

    • 45 C.F.R. §84.52

      • In providing health, welfare, or other social services or benefits, a recipient may not, on the basis of handicap:

        • Deny a qualified handicapped person these benefits or services;

        • Afford a qualified handicapped person an opportunity to receive benefits or services that is not equal to that offered non-handicapped persons; or

        • Provide a qualified handicapped person with benefits or services that are not as effective (as defined in §84.4(b)) as the benefits or services provided to others.


Dhhs enforcement24 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • Legal bases

    • 28 C.F.R. §35.160(b)(1)

      • A public entity shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, a service, program, or activity conducted by a public entity.


Dhhs enforcement25 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • DHHS performed undercover investigation in response to complaints

  • Sent DHHS agents, posing as Medicaid applicants, speaking Spanish, Chinese, and American Sign Language

    • How well would your organization deal with such an investigation?


Dhhs enforcement26 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • Agents told to leave and come back with interpreters

  • Agents found low availability of interpreters and bilingual staff

  • Agents found lack of LEP training

  • Printed materials in English only


Dhhs enforcement27 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • “OCR stands ready to provide immediate, substantial assistance in securing voluntary compliance.”

  • If voluntary compliance cannot be obtained, “it may be effected by the suspension or termination of, or refusal to grant or continue [FFF] or any other means authorized by law.”

    • Lawsuits

    • Consent agreements


Dhhs enforcement28 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • DHHS’ New York investigation resolved with corrective action plan

  • No court-monitored settlement


Dhhs enforcement29 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • DHHS directed New York agencies to:

    • Assess LEP needs

      • Review census and utilization data to determine LEP groups

      • Sounds easy (more difficult in practice)

        • Boston example – used list of Hispanic names


Dhhs enforcement30 l.jpg
DHHS Enforcement

  • Serve LEP population

    • Hire bilingual staff

    • Hire interpreters

    • Contract with volunteers for interpreter services

    • Provide telephone interpreter services

    • Develop policies

    • Conduct training

    • Monitor offices and staff for LEP compliance

    • Appoint statewide LEP coordinator


Almendares v palmer l.jpg

Filed August 24, 2000

Settled October 4, 2005

Almendares v. Palmer


Almendares v palmer32 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • Complaint alleged:

    • Intentional discrimination

    • Discriminatory impact

      • Food Stamp information primarily in English

      • No Spanish-speaking caseworkers

      • No bilingual hearing notices

      • No interpreters at counties


Almendares v palmer33 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • Legal Bases – Claim against County only

  • Ohio Admin. Code 5101:4-1-05(B)(1)

    • The county agency shall provide bilingual program information and certification materials, and staff or interpreters.


Almendares v palmer34 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • Legal Bases

    • U.S. Department of Agriculture regulations

    • 7 C.F.R. §272.4

      • Based on the estimated total number of low-income households in a project area which speak the same non-English language . . . the State agency shall provide bilingual program information and certification materials, and staff or interpreters as specified [above].


Almendares v palmer35 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • Legal bases:

    • U.S. Department of Agriculture regulations

    • 7 C.F.R. §272.6(a)

      • State agencies shall not discriminate against any applicant or participant in any aspect of program administration, including, but not limited to, the certification of households, the issuance of coupons, the conduct of fair hearings, or the conduct of any other program service for reasons of age, race, color, sex, handicap, religious creed, national origin, or political beliefs.


Almendares v palmer36 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • Legal bases:

    • U.S. Department of Agriculture Regulations

    • 7 C.F.R. §15.3

      • No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity of the applicant or recipient to which these regulations apply.


Almendares v palmer37 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • Requested relief

    • Appoint plaintiffs’ lawyers as “monitors” for two years

    • Provide Spanish-language materials for Food Stamp program

    • Provide translators

    • Attorney fees

    • Quarterly compliance reports


Almendares v palmer38 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • County settlement obligations

    • LEP oversight committee

      • LEP population

      • Case-assignment policies

      • Staff training

      • Translation of forms

      • Response to future complaint

    • Attorney fees

    • Class action notices


Almendares v palmer39 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • State settlement obligations

    • Policies and procedures

    • Population assessments

    • “Babel” cards

    • Indicate PLI during data entry

    • Translate forms, brochures, and hearing decisions

    • Study translating all CRIS-E and HATS notices into Spanish

    • Seek funding for “language line”

    • Work to assign LEP cases to bilingual caseworkers

    • Provide written reports to plaintiffs’ lawyers and others

    • Create LEP task force

    • Conduct staff training

    • Attorney fees

    • Class action notices


Almendares v palmer40 l.jpg
Almendares v. Palmer

  • Duration of county and State settlement obligations

    • Immediate

      • Notices, payment of attorney fees

    • Two years

      • Study councils, Plaintiffs’ lawyers’ participation

    • Further

      • Translations, studies

  • Settlement agreement contains timeline


State lep enforcement l.jpg
State LEP Enforcement

  • Hamilton County case

    • Alleged that County failed to provide interpreter

    • Alleged that County voicemail had no Spanish option

    • Alleged that lack of interpreter equaled lack of caseworker

  • Franklin County case

    • Alleged that County failed to provide interpreter


State lep enforcement42 l.jpg
State LEP Enforcement

  • Both cases settled

  • Hamilton County entered into corrective action plan

    • Hamilton County given flexibility in creating its own corrective action plan

  • Franklin County reversed benefits determination in exchange for dismissal of LEP suit


Points to remember l.jpg
Points To Remember

  • Many sources for LEP obligations

  • Many enforcement authorities

    • Develop relationships with enforcement authorities

  • Many remedies available

    • Remedies vary depending on who’s enforcing law

  • When possible, choose your remedy!

  • Be proactive and remedy problems before enforcement becomes necessary


Slide44 l.jpg

This presentation is for educational and general informational purposes only. Nothing in this presentation constitutes legal advice. Neither attending this presentation nor reading these materials creates an attorney-client relationship. Please consult an attorney to answer specific questions regarding LEP issues.


ad