Committee hears bill to create two-tier certification for educational interpreters

The House Education Committee on a public hearing on Substitute Senate Bill 5025 heard testimony that the Professional Educator Standards Board (PESB) should adopt separate, tiered certification standards for educational interpreters who serve students who are deaf, deaf-blind, or hard of hearing.

Megan Wargacki, counsel to the committee, summarized the bill's provisions and timeline. She said the PESB would be required to establish both a full performance standard and a limited performance standard for each educational interpreter assessment, and to create two certificates: one limited and one full. Wargacki noted that interpreters employed by school districts were already required to take assessment(s) and that the bill would formalize limits on how long someone who has not yet met a standard can continue providing services while attempting to meet it.

The bill sets deadlines for schools and certification: educational interpreters employed by school districts must have met the prior performance standard by the start of the 2016–17 school year; under the new proposal, by the beginning of the 2027–28 school year interpreters must hold either the limited or full certificate. The bill would allow interpreters who have not yet obtained a certificate but who demonstrate satisfactory efforts to pursue the full certificate to continue providing services for up to 18 months after completing the assessment. The PESB may adopt rules that add certification requirements for individuals who have not previously worked in the role before Sept. 1, 2026, and may limit how many times an interpreter may take a given assessment. Beginning Dec. 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, PESB must publish data on interpreter certification, including counts by certificate type, demographic information, and geographic distribution.

Sen. John Lubbock, the prime sponsor, told the committee the measure responds to findings that some staff serving deaf and deaf-blind students lacked the highest PESB qualifications and that separate standards for deaf and deaf-blind interpreters would help ensure those students “don't face another obstacle.”

Anna Curran Hoffman of the Professional Educator Standards Board provided technical context and told the committee the bill “would close that loophole” that currently allows interpreters to continue working after repeatedly failing the assessment. Shauna Beaulieu, executive director of the Center for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Youth (CDHY), said the measure would strengthen oversight and data collection and that many current interpreters do not meet the cut score of 4 on the Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA). Beaulieu added that an EIPA score of 4 corresponds to about “catching about 85% of the spoken language in the classroom,” and that the shortfall can leave deaf and hard-of-hearing students missing instruction and incidental learning.

A brief question-and-answer period addressed terminology and implementation logistics. Representative McIntyre asked whether the bill supplies an objective definition of “satisfactory efforts”; Wargacki answered that the bill text does not define the phrase.

The committee received public testimony and 14 pro / 2 con / 1 other sign-ins were noted for the record. The public hearing on Substitute Senate Bill 5025 was closed and committee business proceeded to the next bill.

The proposal in SB 5025 would create new certification and reporting obligations for PESB and change how districts and families can see certification status for educational interpreters; it does not itself appropriate funding in the text presented at the hearing. A fiscal note is available, and staff said they could answer budget questions separately.