Colorado agencies are encountering a growing diversity of languages from residents seeking state services. But what happens when the resources to meet those needs fall short?

Colorado’s limited English proficient individuals are facing barriers to essential state services due to limited language access, which could soon become a focus of the state’s 2025 legislative session.

Over 300,000 Coloradans, or 5% of the state’s population, don’t identify English as their primary language. That number has grown by 20% from 2000 to 2022. This makes equitable language access more important than ever for connecting residents with services and information.

---

---

For state agencies that receive federal funding, language access is considered a federal civil rights requirement. Fortunately for Colorado, a language access report revealed all 12 agencies participating in a study had “taken at least basic steps” to provide language access in their services, with more in the works.

On the other hand, the same agencies acknowledged those efforts weren’t always enough.

---

---

The study, conducted by the Migration Policy Institute in partnership with the Colorado Office of New Americans, underscores the need for improved coordination, funding, and government support to ensure equitable access to public services.

“There are other states that are way farther ahead than us, like New York, Illinois, even Texas and Florida have done really good work on language access for their communities,” Rep. Elizabeth Velasco (D-Glenwood Springs) told the Post Independent. “I feel like this is very timely and needed.”

A growing need for language access

Language access, at a basic level, means that government programs are prepared to communicate with individuals in languages other than English, whether via the use of remote or in-person interpreters for spoken language or the translation of written and online content.

As Colorado has continued to diversify, some of the state’s ongoing strategies to address language access have struggled to catch up.

“The report really highlights what’s happening on the ground (with) our community members and the gaps that are existing,” Velasco said. “There’s gaps in a lot of different spaces — not only in emergency response, but also … when it comes to people coming to testify or even read the drafts of bills because we don’t have a multilingual website yet.”

Velasco, who was re-elected to represent House District 57 in November, has spent her political career advocating for language access in Colorado. She has sponsored successful bills providing emergency communication in multiple languages, protecting insurance consumers who need their documents in different languages and creating a Language Access Advisory Board.

The collaborative study on language access is the first of its kind in Colorado, which was inspired when the 2020 census revealed a greater variety in primary languages than in prior years.

“Our community wouldn’t run without our working families, so we just want everyone to have access to information, to services, to resources, so that we can all thrive,” Velasco said.

As of 2022, Colorado has the 20th largest immigrant population in the country, according to the report. Nearly 1 in 10 of its residents were born outside of the United States.

Roughly 77% of Colorado residents with limited English proficiency are immigrants, with Spanish being the most common primary language. The state’s linguistic diversity also includes smaller communities speaking languages like Vietnamese, Amharic, and Russian, which can make it a significant challenge for state agencies to meet the needs of every group.

While some of these 558,000 immigrants can interact with state services in English, several state programs dealing with education, emergency services and more have found themselves in need of language access.

Because most state agencies are bound by federal civil rights requirements to ensure individuals are not denied service because of limited proficiency in English, failure to provide language access can lead to investigations by federal civil rights offices and even termination of federal funding.

What’s working, and what isn’t

The agencies surveyed reported using different language access measures, some more popular than others. All agencies said they translate written materials and web content, and 11 have hired multilingual staff or interpreters.

Less common approaches include displaying public notices of available language services, which only half of the agencies reported.

All surveyed agencies, even those with multilingual staff, reported utilizing contracted vendors that offered remote translation services. Some agency representatives said this removed the burden from staff members who were not hired as trained translators but were being asked to perform duties outside of their responsibilities.

When neither option was available for translation, clients commonly resorted to using friends or family members — sometimes minors — to translate, which could lead to misunderstandings and raise liability concerns. Only four agencies said they regulate when clients are allowed to do this.

“I was a language access professional for 10 years, and this is a career. We have training and rules and guidelines,” Velasco said, explaining that it’s easier to accidentally add or omit information when family members translate. “We know that something is better than nothing, but the issues are around making sure that people get access to all the information as an English speaker would.”

The report identified several barriers to offering adequate language access, including insufficient resources. The report found many agencies lacked the funding necessary to expand translation services or to hire dedicated language access coordinators — leaving them to rely on multilingual employees not trained in translation.

Because several agencies reported developing language access measures independently, the lack of coordination had led to several inconsistencies — for example, not agreeing on who is responsible for language access. Agencies overseeing public-facing entities said they felt the responsibility for serving non-English speakers ultimately fell to those local partners, which have a difficult time offering services in languages other than Spanish in less populous areas of Colorado.

Lastly, only a handful of agencies have the resources and financing to track and ensure compliance with language access efforts. Most of the agencies examined for the report had limited monitoring mechanisms; only seven provided complaint forms for clients, five reviewed data on the times language services were needed, and three didn’t monitor the efficiency of their language programs using either approach. 

With no overall coordinated effort across agencies or a streamlined approach to language access, interviewees described their agency’s effort on language access

as “throwing darts at the wall and seeing what sticks.”

“Some noted that there was no centralized state office or staff to which agencies could turn with questions or requests related to language access … a sentiment reflected in agencies’ description of their experiences of having to ‘figure out’ language access on their own,” the report read.

These challenges cannot be resolved by focusing on individual agencies. Instead, interviewees’ requests for aid suggest a comprehensive statewide approach might be the best solution:

Increased funding: Although several agencies already had the infrastructure in place to serve those with limited English proficiency, interviewees widely agreed that greater funding would be necessary to keep up with the scale at which language needs are changing.

Government assistance: Almost all agencies said their work lacked technical assistance and guidance from a statewide office or another entity focused on the issue. Rather than having each agency work individually, a more coordinated effort would solve the issue of consistency and lessen the burden of having to “figure it out.”

Dedicated staff: Successful coordination would require one or more full-time staff members to manage language access efforts across different agencies, since existing staff members would no longer need to balance the responsibility against other duties.

Annual planning: Over half of agency interviewees said they wanted an annual planning process in order to update their language access plans and assess whether current needs are being met.

Creating policies: Colorado does not currently have a language access policy, though some agencies said it would help to clarify and enforce standards for language access in the state. A policy would also open the gates for agencies to receive the financial and technical support they’ve requested.

However, some also expressed concerns about a potential statewide language access law or policy. Implementing one could place mandatory requirements on agencies without providing adequate funding or additional staff to comply. Others said a policy might undo their individualized language access efforts.

Legislators propose a solution

Velasco told the Post Independent she’s working on a bill that would address some of the struggles highlighted in the report.

“I’ve been working together with other stakeholders across the state, and we are working on a bill that’s going to be introduced this session to start that process,” Velasco siad. 

Velasco said she’s working with the Colorado Office of New Americans, Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, Spring Institute and other departments to draft the bill, which does not yet have a name.

“We’re in the very early stages. With limited resources available for the budget this year, we’re starting with creating those guidelines so we can compare and assess,” she said, adding that they’ve been looking at the language access efforts of other states as a starting point.

The report itself offered actionable steps to enhance language access in Colorado’s state agencies. The recommendations were heavily based on what agencies said they wanted to see, such as establishing a group with a lead coordinator dedicated to streamlining language access efforts, developing a language access policy, increasing resources and monitoring efforts.

With the state’s $700 million budget shortfall, Velasco emphasized that pushing for collaboration on language access standards would avoid putting a strain on the budget.

“We want to stretch the dollar, maximize the resources,” Velasco said. “The issue that I have seen is that many times our departments work in silos. We want them to be able to share resources.”

The first regulation session of Colorado’s 2025 legislative session will convene on Jan. 8.