Community interpreting (CI) refers to interpreting in public service institutions and differs from other types of interpreting in a number of aspects (e.g., mode of delivery, interaction situation, level of formality/orality present, level of interpreter involvement, status and roles of the participants, level of professionalization, and power asymmetries) (Hale, 2007, p. 31). Compared to conference interpreting, which has achieved the highest level of professionalization within the interpreting world since the 1950s (Pöchhacker, 2004, p. 29), CI is sometimes described as “the poor relation” (Mason, 2001, p. i), a phrase which reflects the status CI has had in the interpreting community until recently. In spite of its low prestige, CI can be said to be one of the most common and oldest types of interpreting (Roberts, 2002, p. 157). Through the centuries, interpreters have had to bridge communication barriers between speakers of different languages and cultures. In interpreting studies (IS), CI has long been neglected. Throughout the 1990s it has gradually become an accepted field of research (Pöchhacker, 2004, pp. 28–9). With respect to practice and training though, its professionalization and acceptance among practitioners, clients, and the public still varies, with a high level of service provision in only a few pioneer countries and the majority of countries lagging behind. This entry will provide an overview of different aspects of CI, the state of training and CI research. It attempts to address both spoken and signed language (SL) interpreting, specifically highlighting aspects in which SL, which enjoys a higher degree of professionalization, differs from spoken-language interpreting.