Evaluation of the Ticket to Work Program Initial Evaluation Report

108
sources. Next we turn to some of the specific causes interviewees identified as contributing
to their TTW-related financial difficulties.
1. Process for Obtaining Payments
From the eight ENs’ perspective, the most problematic piece of the financial viability
puzzle is obtaining payments; comments typically focused on the need to increase revenues,
not to reduce higher-than-expected costs. Most payment-related complaints concerned the
payment process, more so than the structure of the payment system (although structure is
discussed separately, below), 4 particularly difficulties obtaining acceptable documentation of
workers’ earnings, getting the payment requests approved, and then receiving the payments
they are owed.
The earnings documentation that virtually all ENs rely on is pay stubs from TTW
clients. But, interviewees said, clients sometimes neglect or forget to turn in pay stubs
altogether, and even when they do submit pay stubs, the stubs often do not contain the
necessary information to meet SSA standards, such as the pay period start or end date. None
of the approximately 20 clients who have submitted pay stubs to TakeCharge have provided
problem-free documentation. ABIL offers beneficiaries a $25 stipend for each monthly pay
stub, which reportedly helps, but the director considers tracking all the information to be a
major administrative burden, a “nightmare,” she said, resulting in large financial losses for
her organization. She strongly dislikes having to hassle her clients for their pay stubs, adding
unwanted stress in their lives; she would just as soon forgo trying to get payments for
months when pay stubs are not received.
IDR staff feels very strongly that problems in the current payment process continue to
jeopardize the entire TTW program. One staff member said, “This one issue is putting the
entire program at risk.” IDR estimates that it costs the agency $90 to $120 to collect a $279
payment from SSA. IDR further indicated that about 40 to 45 percent of program revenues
are devoted to addressing pay stub issues. Participants are annoyed that they must submit
pay stubs twice—once to the EN and once to the local SSA office. A few of IDR’s
participants who were working full time unassigned their Tickets because they found the pay
stub submission requirement intrusive.
CCSA requires clients to sign a release for any wage information, which is forwarded to
employers with a request that the employer send the wage documentation directly to CCSA.
The release includes language to the effect that the federal government requires CCSA to
4 It is not surprising that for these eight ENs, concerns about structure (payment size,
for example) were less substantial than concerns about the payment process. These were
ENs that initially believed they could make it financially under the TTW payment system and
thus began accepting Tickets. Many other ENs interviewed last year voiced very strong
complaints about the payment system structure; in fact, such concerns led many of them to
decide against accepting any Tickets.
V: Case Studies of Eight Experienced TTW Providers