Evaluation of the Ticket to Work Program Initial Evaluation Report

viewed as lacking the productive capacity to achieve sufficient earnings to generate Ticket
payments.
Initial rejection by an EN does not necessarily mean that an AOI group member would
never be able to participate in the TTW program. It appears that non–SVRA ENs
commonly refer candidates that they perceive will require extensive services to SVRAs,
where they are more likely to be served. Indeed, of the eight experienced ENs we recently
interviewed, the Oklahoma Department of Rehabilitative Services (DRS), an SVRA, was the
only one with a policy of accepting Tickets from all interested beneficiaries. A major factor
influencing the Oklahoma SVRA’s policy of accepting AOI group members was its
substantial level of funding from outside the TTW program. As explained in Chapter V,
Oklahoma had a source of operating revenues that helped it cover service costs for clients
who might not generate Ticket payments for quite some time (if at all). Most non–SVRA
ENs are not in the same financial position.
The process study did reveal that one experienced non–SVRA EN, Marriott’s Bridges
Program, focuses on serving beneficiaries in one of the AOI groups, specifically clients with
ongoing support needs. The Marriott EN had relied primarily on funding from the
Workforce Investment Act and saw TTW milestone payments as a way of modestly
supplementing the types of services it had long provided to its target clients. In this case,
TTW funding did not appear to increase the number of AOI group members served by the
organization. Rather, when beneficiaries managed to generate one or two milestone
payments, the funds enabled Bridges to provide additional services it had not previously
offered. Although this EN’s effort to serve beneficiaries in an AOI group is encouraging,
readers should recall that Bridges was experiencing substantial financial difficulties, with
revenues falling far short of costs.
In summary, early process information shows that the TTW program can give SVRAs
and other providers that have outside funding an additional incentive to serve disability
beneficiaries, including in some cases, those in one or more of the AOI groups. But ENs
that try to rely solely on TTW payments, the new payment systems do not appear to provide
much incentive to serve beneficiaries in general, let alone those in the AOI groups. After all,
if ENs are currently experiencing financial difficulties while service clients who have been
screened as relatively easy to serve—those who appear job ready and not in need of costly
accommodations or supports—then it would seem unrealistic to expect that they would
make a concerted effort to serve beneficiaries in the AOI groups.
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF BENEFICIARIES IN TWO AOI GROUPS
The AOI analysis depends on the ability to define those beneficiaries who might be
accurately categorized into a specific AOI group. Only then can the process analysis
interviews, site visits, and focus groups concentrate on the relevant beneficiaries and
quantitative analyses to investigate properly the participation and outcomes of these
beneficiaries.
121
VI: Adequacy of Incentives Study