Members of the advisory board that reviews the Licensed Court Interpreter (LCI) program voted to allow candidates who pass individual portions of the oral licensing exam to carry those passing scores forward for two years and approved a set of phased steps to expand training and collect applicant data. The board approved the two-year carry-forward, endorsed staff proposals to collect enhanced applicant data, and agreed to pilot a split skills-and-orientation training package as an optional course while collecting evidence of its effect on exam outcomes.

The board's deliberations, led by staff summaries and discussion among advisory members and court administration staff, centered on four priorities the group had previously identified: expand and enhance the existing six-hour orientation, add basic-qualification data collection, develop a language-neutral skills module, and change how oral exam scores are handled so candidates may combine passing sections within a defined time period.

The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) exam and existing OCA (Office of Court Administration) curricula were cited repeatedly as reference points during the discussion. Staff described options they had circulated in a memo and asked the advisory body for direction on which items to recommend to the commission.

"I will point you to a memo that... contained the UTEP course outline and course syllabus, the ACC course outline and course syllabus, and an outline of the curriculum that OCA staff are working on," said Mr. Morgan, a staff presenter, summarizing the materials provided to members. He described recommendations that mirror practices in other jurisdictions: expanded orientation content, optional or required preparatory coursework in some states, screening or data collection, and allowing carry-forward of oral exam sub-scores under a time limit.

Advisory members generally supported an incremental approach. Luis Garcia, an advisory member, cautioned on perception: "When you talk about screening, data collection, degrees, etcetera, it kinda reminded me of the comment that I had made before where people say you guys are always just, making it harder for us to pass." He urged the board to frame data collection as a tool to help applicants rather than as an exclusionary screen.

Several members praised the OCA-developed training outline. One member described the skills module as containing both skill exercises and substantive court knowledge; members recommended separating those pieces so the orientation portion could stand alone while the language-neutral skills portion would be developed and piloted as an optional course. As presented and discussed, that course would be used to evaluate whether taking the training correlates with higher pass rates before the board recommends making it a prerequisite.

Tammy, the exam administrator present during the meeting, described practical considerations for exam administration. She noted jurisdictions vary but generally do not carry forward oral exam scores for more than two years. Tammy also reported that the written exam scores are typically valid for two years and that many jurisdictions limit carry-forward of oral sections to one year in practice; the advisory board elected to recommend two years for consistency with the NCSC agreement and to give candidates time to complete remaining sections.

On formal actions, Judge Branchetti moved the recommendation to carry forward passed portions of the oral exam for two years; the motion was seconded and carried without recorded opposition. The advisory board also moved and approved staff's recommended set of data elements to collect from applicants (education, completion of enhanced orientation, completion of optional skills-building course, written and oral exam outcomes, and remediation history). The board voted to accept the OCA skills-building curriculum but to split it into an orientation unit and a separate, language-neutral skills unit to be offered as an optional pilot while the board collects outcome data. Those pilot and data-collection steps will inform any later recommendation to make training mandatory.

Members discussed adding courtroom observation as a required component of orientation, with examples from other states ranging from about four hours (a simple signed verification form) to more extensive programs. Board members and staff voiced concerns about equity and logistics for applicants who live in rural areas or lack local access to licensed interpreters; virtual observation or leveraging OCA remote hearings were discussed as possible mitigations. The advisory board asked staff to further develop practicable language and logistics for any observation requirement and return with concrete proposals.

The advisory board emphasized a cautious, evidence-based approach: collect data on who takes which preparatory steps and how those steps correspond to pass rates before imposing new preconditions. As Mr. Morgan summed it up, the proposals were intended to produce "a more prepared and more successful exam population" by improving orientation, offering skills development, collecting better applicant data, and allowing candidates to combine passing sub-scores within a defined time window.

The board directed staff to prepare recommendations for the commission and to return with more detailed proposals on orientation expansion and observation logistics. No statutory changes were adopted at the meeting; members observed that the current six-hour minimum orientation is set by rule and that changes to licensing requirements or to the all-three-sections pass rule would need further approval and, in some cases, higher-level signoff.

Votes at a glance:
- Approval of prior meeting minutes: motion moved, seconded and approved (recorded aye votes).
- Motion to allow carry-forward of passed oral exam sections for two years: moved by Judge Branchetti; seconded; motion carried.
- Motion to adopt staff recommendation on enhanced applicant data collection elements: moved and seconded; motion carried.
- Motion to split the OCA skills-building course into an orientation unit and a separate language-neutral skills unit to be offered as an optional pilot while outcomes are collected: moved and seconded; motion carried.

The advisory board asked staff to return with implementation details, a recommendation timeline for the commission, and a plan to pilot the language-neutral skills course and the enhanced orientation elements. The committee adjourned after setting follow-up tasks.