22 Host DeafBlind & Interpreter Meet-and-Greet

Video description: A person is describing the solution titled Host DeafBlind & Interpreter Meet-and-Greet. The transcript is provided below.

Issue: DeafBlind consumers are not familiar with all working interpreters who are available and have some qualifications for working with DeafBlind individuals. DeafBlind consumers are not able to expand their interpreter preference list without knowing the interpreters and their skills.

Proposed Solution: Interpreter referral companies, either individually or collaboratively, host “meet-and-greets” to introduce DeafBlind individuals to Deaf and hearing interpreters who have had at least introductory training to work with DeafBlind individuals. With informed choice from direct conversations with Deaf and hearing interpreters, DeafBlind individuals can determine who they are willing to work with or not. DeafBlind individuals could also share feedback with the interpreter referral companies for individual interpreters on what skill sets they could work on to improve for future work.

Expected outcome: DeafBlind individuals having more informed choice. Interpreters may experience increased requests by DeafBlind individuals. Interpreters may have feedback on how to improve and work more with DeafBlind individuals.

Who is impacted: DeafBlind consumers, interpreters

Timeline: 6 months

Video description: A person is summarizing the level of support that this solution received.

Summary of Support

A majority of the 133 respondents supported hosting deafblind & interpreter meet-and-greet. No group significantly opposed the solution.

Summary of Support Image Description

The stacked bar charts show how respondents rated their level of support and the total number of responses. The percentage for the five support levels is shown from left to right: Strongly Oppose (Dark Red), Oppose (Light Red), Neutral (Yellow), Support (Light Blue), and Strongly Support (Dark Blue).

Respondents may identify with multiple subgroups. The overall level of support is:

Overall
Strongly Oppose: 1%
Oppose: 2%
Neutral: 24%
Support: 47%
Strongly Support: 26%

Click to see the detailed image description for each subgroup.

Interpreter
Strongly Oppose: 0%
Oppose: 3%
Neutral: 22%
Support: 48%
Strongly Support: 28%

Purchasing Agent
Strongly Oppose: 0%
Oppose: 6%
Neutral: 24%
Support: 41%
Strongly Support: 28%

DDBHH Consumer
Strongly Oppose: 1%
Oppose: 1%
Neutral: 17%
Support: 56%
Strongly Support: 23%

Interpreter Referral
Strongly Oppose: 0%
Oppose: 8%
Neutral: 15%
Support: 46%
Strongly Support: 31%

System Stakeholder
Strongly Oppose: 2%
Oppose: 5%
Neutral: 23%
Support: 48%
Strongly Support: 23%

Overview of Respondents Opting for In-Depth Solution Analysis

After indicating their support level, 3% of the 133 respondents opted in to further assess whether the solution would worsen or improve on five metrics. Of the opt-in reviewers (4 respondents), 100% supported the solution, 0% were neutral on the solution, and 0% opposed the solution.

The remaining 129 respondents did not opt in to further assess the solution. Of these people, 72% support the solution, 24% were neutral on the solution, and 3% opposed the solution.

Reviewer Evaluation of Solution Effectiveness

Solution Effectiveness Image Description

The stacked bar charts show how respondents assessed the effectiveness of this solution based on five metrics. For each metric, the percentage of respondents is shown from left to right: Worsens (Red), Improves (Blue), No Impact (Gray).

DDBHH Quality of Life
Makes It Worse 0%
Makes It Better 100%
No Impact 0%

Interpreter Satisfaction
Makes It Worse 0%
Makes It Better 100%
No Impact 0%

Consumer Choice
Makes It Worse 0%
Makes It Better 100%
No Impact 0%

Interpreting Availability
Makes It Worse 0%
Makes It Better 100%
No Impact 0%

Interpreting Quality
Makes It Worse 0%
Makes It Better 100%
No Impact 0%

Reviewer Feedback and Insights

Interpreter

Comments from Interpreters suggest this is a good idea for fostering community connections and building positive working relationships. One comment suggests combining the event with existing DeafBlind Club gatherings to create a more organic sharing experience. Another comment highlights the importance of feedback from the DeafBlind community to improve training efforts and work quality.

Deaf, DeafBlind, Hard of Hearing

Comments from DDBHH Consumers express the need for multiple sessions over time and the inclusion of rural areas. One comment suggests allowing DeafBlind individuals who use oral communication to participate online and ensuring freelance interpreters are included in the events.

System Stakeholder

Comments from System stakeholders suggest the event could help build a sense of belonging and support within the community.