FCC Told to Improve Oversight of VRS Fund

Chairman Julius Genachowski believes “the VRS program is an extremely important and valuable program … and we are committed to keeping the program and to having it run in a way that is efficient and effective for the people who it serves,” said Sherrese Smith, aide to the chairman. The door to the chairman’s office is “always open,” and “this is not the first nor will it be the last time we talk about this.” For the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, “nothing is a higher priority for us than ensuring that this very valuable service continues on a sound footing,” said CGB Chief Joel Gurin.

VRS “is in its difficult adolescent phase,” said Inclusive Technologies President Jim Tobias. “It’s gone through some problems, it’s had its brush ups with the law, and we need to take it aside and talk to it firmly but gently, and I think very positively.” It’s time to review why people use video relay service, and how the technology should develop going forward, he said. As it addresses VRS, the FCC should remember that the service is for hearing users, too, said Claude Stout, executive director of Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. VRS allows hearing users to communicate with deaf people without any special equipment like Teletype devices, he said.

Several consumer advocates urged the FCC to increase staffing in CGB’s Disability Rights Office. Currently, there are four people in the office monitoring a nationwide, $900 million telecom relay service industry, said Stout. “That’s insane. I think that we should have perhaps 30 staff to monitor this huge industry.” More staff would enable the FCC to more quickly resolve a “huge backlog” of petitions and proceedings, said Karen Strauss of the Coalition of Organizations for Accessible Technology.

To stop abuse, panelists recommended more transparency and clearer guidelines about what types of calls are compensable under the VRS fund. Several panelists also backed creating a fraud hotline for consumers and interpreters. “Providers have pushed the limit,” engaging in “a lot of different schemes,” but efforts to get feedback from the FCC have historically failed, said Strauss. She urged more dialog and openness “so that providers understand what can be done and what can’t be done, and consumers know what providers are planning on doing as well.” The FCC should audit the entire VRS program, said consumer advocate Sheri Farinha of the California Coalition of Agencies Serving the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Until then, “we're guessing” what’s wrong, she said. Also, the fund administrator the National Exchange Carrier Association should regularly update the FCC when a providers minutes of use spike or fall significantly, she said.

Some questioned the neutrality of having industry association NECA oversee the VRS fund. NECA’s administration of the fund seems to present some “conflicts of interest,” said Krishna Jayakar, a professor at Penn State University. The program should be monitored by people with no ties to the industry, said Strauss. That could be the FCC or an independent entity contracted by the agency, she said.

While VRS fraud and abuse must be addressed, the FCC must “tread carefully” to avoid infringing on people’s right to make calls to whoever they want, said Rosaline Crawford, director of the National Association for the Deaf. Farinha agreed, saying the FCC must be careful not to let efforts to curb abuse “destroy the most functionally equivalent service” that deaf users “have today.”

Strauss urged more FCC feedback on fraud issues. Fraud disclosure to the FCC hasn’t been an issue, but there hasn’t been enough response from the FCC, which discourages communications with the FCC on fraud issues, she said. The commission should establish a transparent communications platform and put everything on the record, she said. Stout urged the FCC to add more staff to have more frequent communications with the industry.

Hayes urged ground rules on VRS calls to determine what calls are allowed. It’s critical that the FCC and NECA establish an oversight group to monitor VRS practices without breaching consumer privacy and confidentiality, she said. The FCC should analyze and aggregate VRS calls, she said, saying the commission should look at the overall call data not individual calls. Meanwhile, it will be “scary” to have states manage VRS because VRS quality would be affected in states with limited budgets, she said. There should be clear policy on VRS pricing and certification, said Crawford. Part of VRS rate issues is the lack of transparency, Strauss said. The providers should clarify what the rates cover, she said. Additionally, the FCC needs to establish clear guidelines on certification, said Stout.