Reimbursement Rate for VRS
15 05 2007All..
I am sure by now many of you have received emails, etc., that the FCC should not reduce $6.644 per minute for VRS provider.
See this link SorensonLink
Are these concerns justified? Let’s see..
I will let u all use ur judgement.
Let’s look at how much one Video Interpreter makes for VRS provider in one month by doing just 8 hrs a day.
Let’s assume only 70% of minutes a VI does in a month actually are reimbursed by the Interstate TRS Fund at $6.644 per min.
8 hours x 60 min = 480 minutes. 448 x 70% (.7)= 336. That is for one day. So 336 minutes x 30 days = 10,080 minutes; that is for one month. 10,080 x $6.644 = $66,971.52.
That is what one Video Interpreter makes for the VRS provider in one month $66,971.52. Let’s say there are 10 VIs in one VRS center, so that means $66,971.52 x 10 = $669,715.20 in just one month is earned by that center
Well, from just 10 VIs for one center in one month makes $669,715.20 a month. One year is about $8,036,582.40. That is a lot of money.
Remember VRS is provided 24 hours a day, but I thought I’ll limit to just 8 hrs a day to give u an idea of how much one VI makes for VRS providers.
Of course, there are overhead costs such as relay center, lighting, tax, etc., etc. Surely these revenues are enough to cover all that plus nice profit.
One interesting observation was the salary of VI (probably makes $50K to $65K a YEAR). VI makes $66.9K for VRS providers for a MONTH yet they earn less than that in a year.
Just to put things into perspective so u can make ur judgement if the worry of further cutbacks would severly hurt VRS industry or not. If I am completly wrong, feel free to comment.
eyes wide open & thumbs up,
Ed
RT Admin.
And …. the VRS provider has to spend a LOT of money on outreach and customer support. Many of the providers give away free video phones and routers and send technicians out to customer homes to install them and to teach us how to use them.
I had one VRS customer that required 10 trips to their home! (The last time I went out, a dog had chewed through their internet cable. Grr….)
Other customers were on Neighbor Islands so I had to fly over there, rent a car, get a hotel room, etc., etc., etc. On some trips, I took a subcontractor with me so we could reach more customers, and that doubled the costs, two airfares, two hotel rooms, more meals, etc.
The technology is not perfect, yet. Quality is “pretty good” but still not as effective as sitting in the same room with an interpreter. Someone has to pay for the continuing development of new technologies; and then someone has to pay to go out and replace all the “old” video phones with newer better faster video phones.
We want full interconnectivity between all of our video phones. I want to be able to call my mother-in-law’s Sorenson VP from my intel based Mac computer with iSight using her ten-digit phone number. Someone needs to pay for the translators and servers and technologies that will make that possible.
Most of us use our video phones – provided free by the VRS providers – for chatting with friends a lot more than we use them for making reimbursable VRS calls. (Ethics note: I paid for my own video phone; I was working for a VRS provider at the time and did not want ANY question about who went to the top of the waiting list so I paid for my own D-Link and let the customers have the ones paid for by my employer and my state administrator.)
Most of us do not pay for our own phones. VRS providers donate video phones and booths and support and training to our colleges and universities and voc rehab offices. The VRS providers set up booths and technology fairs all over the country so we each have the opportunity to see new equipment and talk one-on-one to our service providers. Some of them spend money on outreach materials and DVDs to teach hearing people how VRS works so that the stores and the doctors and the agencies won’t hang up when we call them.
Many Deaf – especially in rural areas – do not have access to affordable broadband. If the VRS providers want us to use their services, they may need to find a way to pay for rural broadband. (My high-speed satellite dish cost $1,200 to install and I pay $125 per month for enough bandwidth to use VRS! Eek. How many rural deafies surviving on SSI or SSDI because of job discrimination can afford that!)
Point is …. VRS costs a lot more than just paying for the VI. Are the VRS providers making lots of money? Who knows … But – once again – the current FCC commissioners have decided to make internet based services, including VRS, competitive, free-market, for-profit products. Bah, humbug!
I understand your viewpoint, Ed. As a state administrator you want to make sure the tax-payers are getting a good value for their tax dollar. As a former relay service provider, I wanted MORE MINUTES so my annual bonus would go up!
But …. WHO is really important here is the Deaf End-User of VRS services. If the per minute rate for VRS goes down, we will get fewer services, fewer free video phones, fewer upgrades to the technology, less qualified interpreters, lower quality video streaming, and longer waits for an available VI. If the VRS per minute rate goes up, we get more, better, faster services.
My vote? Make the VRS reimbursement rate $15 per minute! When the Congress sees the VRS reimbursement hit one billion dollars, they’ll wise up and turn management of internet based relay back over to state administrators, where it SHOULD be.
(Meaning: I would rather have people like you, Ed, making decisions about video phone quality and VI vacancy rates and outreach budgets. The alternative in today’s schema is a stock holder counting his quarterly dividends!)
Tell the FCC: Raise the Rates!
(jk-II; Rantin’ and Ravin’ in Pecos)
Jane, I like you. Even if u disagree with me, you make it pleasant. I will hold back my thoughts until I see more comments on this intriguing issue. Ed
I understand where you’re coming from Jane, however, the providers don’t get reimbursed and are NOT supposed to include the costs of the customer premise equipment, installation, etc. in their reimbursement calculations. It is a cost of doing business. The phone company would have to provide the telephone poles, the wiring, the installation, etc. to a hearing customer, so the same should be true for a Deaf customer. Their cost of doing busines should not be included in the reimbursement rate. The ADA clearly says that they are to make their [phone company] services accessible. If a non-telephone company has chosen to get into the game of VRS then they have to assume the same responsibilities for the cost of doing business.
I am no longer involved with Snap!VRS but I believe, correct me if I’m wrong Ed, some of the underlying issues are that there is no transparency into executive compensation, effectiveness of outreach programs, investment in technology that improves effectiveness and efficiency of VRS, etc…
You may also want to read the white paper I submitted to the FCC for some other information and details.
Best,
Daryl Crouse, CI, CT
Founder and Former President of Snap Telecommunications (Snap!VRS)
As the “See this link SorensonLink” indicates , the VRSCA is a Sorenson sponsored Consumer Organization. So in effect this VRS provider is trying to influence deaf and hard of hearing consumers to support the industry’s viewpoint. Unfortunately, this is a very common practice among numerous industrial groups in their attempts to influence government decisions in their favor – especially in pharmaceutical industries.
I listen only to TDI (Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc.), NAD (National Association of the Deaf), HLAA (Hearing Loss Association of America) as they are the true representatives of deaf and hard of hearing consumers and ignore all pseudo consumer organizations sponsored by industry.
Interesting thought, however, let’s open the door of a VRS provider and go inside there. You will see tens and tens of workers in different departments working to provide a good service to the Deaf and Hard of Hearing community. Image when FCC rate goes down, those employees will go out looking elsewhere. That will affect our communications. Do we want to go back to the “TTY age” where there is nothing can be improved?
Engineers are constantly working on improvements and betterment of our visusal communications. Most of us will always want something better to communicate effectively even we could not match the hearing side.
Perhaps VRS providers do make nice profits but we need to keep them motivated to do a good service for us. All companies are in pursue for good profits. If they don’t, they will do something else. In fact, FCC allows VRS providers to have 11% profit margin (Correct me if I am wrong). Most companies earn at least 20% revenue. Even some of them earn outrageous profits from the governments.
VRS itself needs to improve. Technology, customer support and interpreting skills and others.
Some VRS providers provide funds for interpreting training in colleges and unversities. Good pay will encourage potential interpreters to complete their training and remain in the field. Current interpreters stay because of good incentives.
Money talks.
I am for FCC rate to stay or raise.
My 2 cents.
If Sorenson whines, let them. The VRS industry needs to learn to become independent from public funding.
Keep in mind – the money does not only go to the salaries of the employees but this is where Sorenson has succeeded while others has failed. They invested in the TECHNOLOGY of the camera. Would we all want to see better videophones? Of course we would! And the only way to do so is to be able to invest in technology as well as service. I haven’t seen the VP-200 but i have heard rave reviews from people who do. And this wouldn’ t be possible without the ability to invest in technology. I am all for it as long as they are smart about it – I just wish that other VRS would invest in the technology as much as Sorenson would then there wouldn’t be such a monopoly.
Nice to see simple math used to make a point ED. Thank you for putting it out there!
Upon reading comments, at first, I thought Jim Jones was back brainwashing people (wink). Some people believe that it is OK for “BIG BUSINESS” to earn multiples of what the rest of us earn but I do not agree.
I do believe that those who work hard, harder than others should earn more but you can not tell me that VRS providers work harder than we do in agencies providing sign language interpreters in local communities. We have the same needs. We have to train interpreters. We have been doing this for decades! We have to pay for overhead, telephone systems, office machines, computers, IT technology… we have to replace equipment and software about every three years. We have to follow ADAS guidelines and hire interpreters to work staff meetings and training to include employees who are deaf. We have to convince our customers (not to mention members of the Deaf community) that our price is not highway robbery everytime we book an interpreter.
We gross, not 12 X more than we pay the interpreter but hope for 20% more than we pay the interpreter to cover expenses which brings us to a zero profit… We pay the cost even when the client refuses to reimburse us or a university finds it hard to meet the budget and holds payment for months at a time… We are constantly explaining the positives in following ADA guidelines. No one reimburses us for the hours it takes to submit bids, rewriting the RFPs again and again to match what we know to be cost effective and best practices.
Luckily, we have been keeping pace with VRS providers when it comes to paying the interpreter about the same as they would get if working in a call center but we can not compete with the one stop worksite, provide the extensive benefits packages or offer the long hours consistently.
Lucky too, most interpreters really like working in the community, they will drive from place to place to see their customers face to face, experiencing their worlds and feel the emotion in varying locations with varying consumers…. so interpreters are great! They do a little VRI and a little educational work and a little community work.
Another positive for the interpreters, VRS providers have helped pull wages for interpreters up, encouraged new interpreters to enter Interpreter Training Programs…
…but the “Golden Goose” will fly away eventually and then we will see who will stay and who will go, who is doing a good job and making a good living and who is in it for the BIG BUCKS!
Daryl, you are right. With a government contract, all records have to be available for audit. There are times when a govt employee will come into our offices and check to see that the work was done, the interpreter invoiced and paid for the work. When there is no transparency, and millions in Tax dollars are being spent, something is just not right…
My brother is interpreter for Sorenson. He mentioned to me before that vrs interpreter can’t work more than 30 hours per week at about $50 per hour. Still that is a lot of money like you point out. I wonder if other vrs companies are the same? I will not sign the petition or a letter about the rate change because I feel VRS makes too much money. How much does the CEO and other high ups make?
Hey there to the “other” Koch.
Don’t forget… several VIs in a center requires some serious bandwidth pipes and they’re not cheap. Network Admins, PC support, servers, switches, routers, security software(!!), top of the line PCs (if they use webcams), rent in “good” locales — VI centers aren’t typically in backwoods areas, but in major cities where rent are high, salaries for managers/executives, marketing dollars… how’d they sponsor DeafNation, sporting events, Deaflympics, etc? Prohibitive workers’ comp costs in some states. You’ll be surprised. VRS providers aren’t exactly swimming in cash.
Providers,
I’d like for you to submit the breakdown of current rate FCC is paying to you all,
Show the amount of minutes you have accumulated for one month and calculate that number of minutes with the FCC’s current rate, show how much you are spending that into the departments (breakdown).
That will allow us all (administrators, consumers, etc) come up with an educated decision to whether support this or not.
FYI – I’m all for vendors making a profit. It’s just that I don’t like being told “FCC cut this! FCC cut this!” rather than “here’s the breakdown – let me show where we’re spending $$ into”
Robin
Richard Roehm wrote:
Huh?
Does that mean you are willing to pay for VRS out of your own pocket? IF VRS (and other relay services) do not receive public funding, who will pay? Let’s all go back to 1967 when we had to ask our children to make our phone calls for us?
Folks, most of your comments, questions and concerns have already been addressed by HOVRS.
HOVRS filed lengthy comments addressng this issue. I do believe that those documents will provide you with a better understanding of the issues.
HOVRS Comments
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6519411431
HOVRS Exhibits
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6519411432
Kelby – HOVRS isnt the only provider out there that has addressed the questions and concerns by folk out there that are dependent on VRS services. I’ve reviewed comments by all VRS providers and note that their response has been as effecient or exceeds those of HOVRS. Respectfully, Clyde
The numbers are lower than Ed’s calculations:
Interpreters do not work 8 hours a day, or at least they shouldn’t. It’s a very physically demanding industry and prone to RSI issues. 30 hours a week is about right, from what I understand.
They also don’t work 30 days in a month. I know many who work six days a week, but most work five. So that’s 20-25 days a month for one interpreter.
Bob,
My fault for not being clear. I was referring to one video interpreter as opposed to persons. In other words, there are always one video interpreter that does 8 hrs (it may require two persons or more – but essentially there is always one video interpreter). I chose 8 hrs instead of 24 hrs, so the numbers probably will be higher than what I did. I hope I make sense.
My calculation is by any means not perfect, but it should be around the ballpark area.
Ed
Ed. Let’s assume a typical VRS provider with 200,000 minutes a month. Its interpreters need breaks after working calls, so it targets them not to work more than 50 percent of the time. However, not all their work time is billable, so billables run about 34 to 38 percent of the time. Let’s assume they get paid $47 an hour, less than some of the comments above. Let’s assume benefits are the national average of 28 percent. Your interpreter cost is now $4.05 per minute. Add supervisors, schedulers, customer support, long distance charges, rent and utilities and you get about $4.75 without accounting for headquarters cost which includes human relations, engineering, training, legal, recruiting, management, marketing and outreach, network equipement and call center equipement which for a small company like that adds another $2 a minute. Then add required return and you are at about $7 a minute. Now if the VRS provider was running about 4,000,000 minutes a month would its costs be lower because some of those non-call center costs are not directly variable. Sure, but it would still have that minimum $4.75 call center costs, plus it would have a boat load of call centers to buy equipment for, would need more HR, engineering, management, accounting and legal expense, and would likely have to pay a premium to keep finding VIs. How much lower would its costs be than the 200,000 a month provider? Hard to tell, but right now almost all providers are in the 200,000 a month or lower category from what I can tell which is why NECA indicated in April that the average cost figure given by VRS providers was about $7.
Lyon,
Thanks for ur comments. I was hoping someone from VRS industry would respond to that. It helps readers of edsalert get other opinions.
By the way, I got a few calls from several representatives of VRS providers. I will acknowledge that my 70% of Video Interpreter is probably not realistic number; that occupancy rate is probably lower than that. How much more lower is a difficult one to estimate without knowing all the facts. Efficiency comes into play and all that it is much harder to measure efficiency.
Cheers…
Ed
Hello,
I am a certified VRS interpreter. I do not earn anywhere close to $60,000 a year. I am paid a flat hourly rate, which is much less than what I make in the community interpreting.
Stacy,
Glad to see an interpreter commenting. From all accounts and quite a few feedbacks from interpreters themselves, I think ure in minority. However, $60K is probably the high salary, not so much as the average. I’ve no foggiest idea what the true average is.
Some locations do indeed pay equal or better than VRS, but I understand they are few and far between. Maybe ure in one. If there are other interpreters reading this, let me know if I’m completly off the base or not.
Cheers…
Ed
Hi, I too am a VRS interpreter. The going rate for houly VI interpreters is about $25 to $40 per hour, on average. From my own experience most VI’s do not work more than 20 hours a week. Most work 2 or 3 days a week, or even 2 or 3 times a month. Few and I mean few work more than 6 hour shifts. The burn out rate is high and as demand grows, we are feeling the weight of being nationally understaffed.
I am a Sorenson VRI and I can tell you that your numbers for the terps’ pay is way off. We typically don’t make that much. VRS terps get paid significantly less than what we make out in the community, especially the part time and full-time employess. If you are full time or part time employees, your pay is reduced to compensate for the benefits you can receive.
Keinark,
Thanks for ur comments. I find ur remarks interesting. You said VRI, I assume you meant video remote interpreting. The figures I suggested is based on feedback from Video Interpreters from VRS industry. It is bit on the high side, but I used the higher side to show even with high salaries, VRS industry makes nice profit. So what you said in ur comments indicates that VRS industry is making even more profit.
eyes open & thumbs up,
Ed
I’d like to contact Jane Knox as I’m one of those rural folks who is looking for a satellite that would provide enough broadband. Here’s an excerpt of her comments.
Many Deaf – especially in rural areas – do not have access to affordable broadband. If the VRS providers want us to use their services, they may need to find a way to pay for rural broadband. (My high-speed satellite dish cost $1,200 to install and I pay $125 per month for enough bandwidth to use VRS! Eek. How many rural deafies surviving on SSI or SSDI because of job discrimination can afford that!)
Paul Taylor,
Are you the same person that I knew many years ago? You were one of the original ones that started relay service, right?
Anyway, I’m sure Jane Knox will read the comments and will get back to you. I had Hughes Net for “high speed broadband”. What a joke. I’ve changed into wireless service, not best, but doable.
eyes open & thumbs up,
Ed
There are some big holes in your math Ed. The average VI is only billable for 35% to 45% of the time they are working. Billable minutes are only generated when the VI is connected to BOTH the hearing and the deaf parties. Thus VRS providers set goals for 40% billable for the VI. So the figure of $66k per VI per month is FLAWED at best.
And to the idiot that said VRS companies need to become independent of public funding. That would mean deaf people would have to pay for the service… ummm hello!?! Not a good idea!
BJ,
This is an old one, and you’re right about actual reimbursement times which is an average of 35% to 45% of VI’s time. I understand one VRS provider managed to do about 70% to 75%. High call volume, minimizing start and wrap up times, and other program tools make it possible.
No argument with you on the idea of VRS becoming independent of public funding. Won’t work. England tried it and not too successful I might add. Sweden and South Korea governments fully subsidize VRS thus they work.
Ed
Can or will anyone tell me if HughesNet can be used with a Vidio Phone? My husband is deaf and we used the Vidio Phone back in Colorado, but since we moved back to Kentucky in the country we’re have a devil of a time getting him back on again. If not HughesNet, will dialup do?