Identify what needs translation and what needs a factual explanation from someone who understands the employer’s process. Do not let uncertain terminology be replaced by invented meaning.
Agree on the translation and explanation scope
Separate full document translation, internal term clarification and professional review from current government charges. Ask for corrections where meaning is unclear rather than paying for an unnecessarily elaborate but inaccurate description. An acronym that recurs across many records should be resolved once and logged, so a later document reusing the same term does not trigger a fresh explanation and a fresh charge.
Ask an employee who uses the term daily whether a short internal note captures its meaning before any outside research gets commissioned, since routine business shorthand that does not affect how the specialized-knowledge claim gets explained rarely justifies that expense. Keep a short running list distinguishing terms already resolved from terms still open, and share it with whoever prepares later filings for the same employer or a related petition down the line. Revisit that list occasionally, since a term marked resolved early on can carry a different meaning once a process or team changes, and treating an old note as permanently accurate risks repeating the very confusion the research was meant to fix.
Reserve paid outside research for terminology whose meaning genuinely changes the explanation of the applicant's process knowledge, not for shorthand that any reader familiar with the department would already recognize on sight.