All of you. My name is george rivas. I am the director of the office of Civic Engagement and immigrant affairs, i am joined by my colleague chloe noonan, who is our policy and engagement officer, who oversees our Language Access efforts at oca. I am looking forward to sharing more Background Information about our office and then chloe will share more background on the lao report from 2024, and will walk us through the contents of that report as well, ill take next slide. I will take a moment to share some background about our office. The office of Civic Engagement and World Affairs was founded in 2 in 2009, at which time it was designated to oversee implementation of the equal access to Services Ordinance and with time, as you all know now, its become the Language Access ordinance. Today, eoc has a policy compliance, direct services and grant making City Department. Our mission is to promote inclusive policies and foster immigrant assistance programs that lead to full civic and economic and linguistic integration for the benefit of the public, and as a reminder to all of us. Oca moves our Mission Forward in a few, in a few ways through Civic Engagement. For example, in our Civic Engagement work, we partner very closely with immigrant Rights Commission, where we hear directly from the public and then advise the city leadership on immigrant matters. We also partner very closely with local groups to provide education to immigrant parents who are voting in the School District. Elections to know their rights, and normally are our local lead for the census, for community safety. We our Community Ambassador program, for example, we its a Workforce Development program where we partner provide a safety presence and engage residents with referrals and connections to Public Services and predominantly immigrant, multilingual neighborhoods. Through grant making. We provide grants to further Language Access in our communities and create spaces for belonging for our immigrants. We also provide grants to provide additional affirmative Legal Support to our immigrants. Integrated immigrant services, where we provide affirmative services for immigrants such as our pathways to citizenship program, whos been around for ten years. We also provide support to Daca Recipients for them to renew their applications. We also have a dream Fellowship Program where we partner very closely with our local organizations and place fellows to gain professional experience regardless of status and of course, Language Access, the Language Access unit is a small team of interpreters and translators that provide Language Services for important Public Meetings and supplement some departments Language Access needs. We manage citywide contracts for Language Services, whether its through vendors. We also provide Technical Assistance to city agencies and conduct annual Compliance Training to city staff. The unit also follows up on Language Access complaints that are made by our residents, and ensure that theres a summary provided to the immigrant Rights Commission on a quarterly basis. And we also monitor the departments compliance with the Language Access ordinance and submit a compliance summary report to the city each year, which which is a main piece of our presentation today. And with that, i will pass the mic over to my colleague chloe noonan. Our policy and Civic Engagement officer, to present the 2024 Language Access summary report. Thank you. Director rivas. Hello, supervisors. Before discussing the Language Access ordinance in greater detail, i want to take a moment to talk about some frequently used terms to help ensure that we have shared language in the discussion. When we say lao, were referring to the Language Access ordinance, administrative code 91, which directs city agencies to ensure that Public Services and information are accessible to all people, regardless of language ability. The acronym lep refers to limited english proficient, a term used to refer to people who do not read, write, speak, or understand english, or for whom english is not a primary language. We often refer to San Franciscos required language as also described sometimes as threshold languages. The current law requires City Departments to provide Language Access services in chinese, spanish, and filipino, and languages are eligible for certification by oca once they reach a population threshold of 10,000 lep residents. This slide has some background about the history of the Language Access ordinance. The ordinance was first adopted as the equal access to Services Ordinance in 2001. Went through a couple of rounds of amendments in 2009 and 2015, which, after several years of implementation work, brings us here today to discuss current city compliance and additional amendments that aim to further strengthen the lao. Here you can see an overview of City Department responsibilities and oca responsibilities under the current Language Access ordinance. One of oshas responsibilities is to monitor and report compliance to the immigrant Rights Commission and the board of supervisors, which includes developing and publishing the annual Language Access compliance summary report. This is the context in which we present and discuss the 2024 Compliance Report today. Under the current lao public facing, City Departments must collect data about their language, access activities and submit an annual Compliance Report to oca by october 1st. And we have. Here are just a quick preview of the types of information that departments include in their Compliance Reports, which ill discuss more deeply in a couple more slides. Here are the link and front cover for the 2024 Language Access compliance summary report. The report is publicly available on oshas website listed here, though well do an overview of the report today. I encourage you all to take a look at the report afterwards. Whenever you have time. On the topic of population data, the report contains the snapshot of San Francisco and supervisorial district data. This section includes some citywide data points as well as lep population data for supervisorial districts. The source of this data is the census bureaus 2018 to 2022 five Year American community survey. As you can see, 1 in 3 San Francisco residents is an immigrant and 18. 9 of residents identify as lep. On the right side of the page, we have some supervisorial district data points available which show total population and lep population across districts and the district with the highest percentage of lep residents is district 11, at 35. Lep population. Here you can see a copy of the language diversity dashboards that oca publishes online each year, along with the compliance summary report. The dashboards show citywide data and can also be broken down by individual supervisorial districts. These numbers reflect both total population language population and lep population within languages, and these dashboards are Available Online at the website listed here. To take a moment to briefly talk about some of the key data points that departments are asked to report about, i can speak first to Data Collection method. The current Language Access ordinance allows for three different types of Data Collection that departments can use to track their interactions with lep. Members of the public. This includes the intake method. The survey method, or telephonic interpretation records. Oca usually recommends the intake method, as this is the most accurate way to capture and record the data every year. Departments also have to report the number of total lep client interactions their department had with members of the public. Broken down by language, we also ask departments to report on the total number of Materials Department departments translated during the fiscal year. They also report on inperson interpretations conducted and telephonic interpretations conducted on the topic of bilingual staff. Departments also share their total numbers of bilingual staff, including both total staff and total certified bilingual staff. And on the topic of budgets, departments are also asked to include information about how much they spent on Language Access services during the fiscal year, specifically, departments are asked to report about compensatory pay for bilingual staff, excluding regular salaries, money spent on vendors that provided telephonic Interpretation Services, document translation and on site Interpretation Services, money spent on other costs associated with providing Language Access services such as grants or special programs, and the total sum spent by a department on Language Access services during the fiscal year. This years data showed encouraging upward trends across multiple data measures. This included increases in use of the intake method of Data Collection, total lep client interactions, translated materials, and inperson interpretations. The data also showed decreases on a few measures compared to the last fiscal year. This included decreases in telephonic interpretations, decreases in bilingual staff citywide, and decreases in Language Services budgets. There may be a few factors impacting the decrease in telephonic interpretations. For example, more Department Services and information transitioned to being more accessible online during the pandemic. Continued implementation of the citys digital accessibility and inclusion standard has also increased the amount of information and services that Community Members can access digitally. On the topic of bilingual staff, there could be a range of factors potentially impacting this number, such as staffing shortages in the city overall, inadequate recruitment, hiring and retention practices. Staff retirement may be a factor, and we included increasing bilingual staffing as one of oshas recommendations in the report this year. The decrease in Language Services budgets may also be due to a couple of factors. To pause for a moment and share some background about this data point. Department Language Services budgets can be a helpful way to get a sense of how much departments are spending and investing in Language Access over time. That said, there are a lot of factors that can impact this data point, which is important to consider when putting the data into context. For example, a department that relies heavily on bilingual staff to address language needs will likely spend less than a department that relies heavily on vendors to address those needs. Its not necessarily an indicator on its own of whether a department is or isnt, prioritizing Language Access and looking at the whys really important in looking at the departments with the biggest decreases this year, our data analysts determined the main driver of the decreases was due to operational adjustments. So one example of this we learned that if the department of Public Health has been working to streamline their processes into a newly created department of interpreter services, which will consolidate many aspects of their Language Services activities, they also had an issue where they had to change telephonic interpretation. Vendors during the fiscal year. Another department that showed less spending this year was the San Francisco port. Their data showed that their interactions with the public saw a rather steep decline during the pandemic, and is just now slowly starting to build up again. One brief anecdote is that the port actually recently held an inperson industry job fair for youth, and worked with oca to make sure that lep students attending the event would have access to interpretation at the workshop. And the feedback ive heard is that it was really engaging and successful event for lep attendees. A third example of operational adjustment came from the department of elections. So the amount of money election spends on Language Access each year varies depending on the number of elections that took place, and this can lead to spending fluctuations. For example, when elections is conducting outreach and education for elections one year and then one election the next year. Next slide please. Here are the recommendations that oca included in our Compliance Report this year on the topic of Language Access capacity building, we recommend that departments increase their department specific Language Access, instruction and training for public facing city staff, and that includes training for Public Contact staff on department specific protocols for arranging interpretation and Translation Services. On the topic of resource planning, we recommended that departments hire and retain more bilingual staff to ensure sufficient internal resources for addressing the needs of lep Community Members served by City Departments, and we also recommended exploration of future opportunities to supplement Language Access activities with new tools and emerging technologies. On the topic of Language Services budgets, we recommended that departments increase their Language Services budgets and support for Community Partners serving lep individuals. As we know that this recommendation comes during a constrained budget season and in the context of the current city economic climate, it will be important for departments to be intentional in partnering with city suppliers and Community Partners to bolster capacity for serving lep individuals when delivering Department Information and services. And lastly, on the topic of Data Collection and analysis, we recommended continued improvement of current compliance Data Collection protocols. Tracking Language Access activities consists ohlone and refinement of multiple data sources for a more diverse Language Access data landscape. Ill now hand the mic back to director rivas to talk about current capacity at oshas Language Access unit. Thank you chloe. In addition to the compliance compliance summary report that were hearing that were hearing today, and also the amendments to the Language Access ordinance that were being discussed, we were asked to present a brief summary of what the needs will be at oca to successfully implement the amendments and potentially the trailing resolution that will come with more programmatic direction for oca. Here is a quick org chart of the