Evaluation of the Ticket to Work Program Initial Evaluation Report

B.23
estimate of the financial loss, indicating that they did not have access to that information,
but did provide examples of the factors that contributed to the losses. EES staff indicated
that they have had more difficulty than anticipated placing clients in employment. The
reasons for this include: a reduced number of jobs available in the current economy; some
beneficiaries not actively participating in the effort (e.g., not returning phone calls or
unwilling to cooperate); and some beneficiaries being very specific or particular about the
types of jobs they are willing to accept.
Interviewees also indicated that it has been extremely difficult to obtain earnings
information from those who were placed in employment. Contrary to early expectations that
tracking earnings would not be a problem, Glick and Glick has found it very labor-intensive
and difficult to obtain the necessary information. Interviewees note that neither beneficiaries
nor employers have any incentive under TTW to provide the EN with the earnings
information. Other Glick and Glick business dealings that require earnings tracking typically
involve a contract with a large employer’s corporate office that is willing to provide the
information because it is part of the terms of the agreement it has with Glick and Glick, and
because the employer benefits from the services that Glick and Glick provides (filled
vacancies and tax credits). No such relationship exists between the EN and many of the
employers of Glick and Glick’s TTW clients.
Program Administration. Interviewees noted several ongoing issues encountered in
administering TTW that center around the EN payment process. First, the primary struggle
throughout implementation of TTW has been obtaining the pay information from
beneficiaries. Although some of their TTW clients are very good about submitting pay
information, many are not, and attempts to obtain the information directly from employers
has met with very limited success. Second, Glick and Glick interviewees indicate that often it
has taken a very long time for payment claims to be processed, stating that they are told by
the Program Manager that these claims are “pending field action.” Interviewees note that
more recently, however, the payment turnaround time seems to be improving. Third,
interviewees have been frustrated by the fact that beneficiaries do not know which benefits
they are receiving (SSI, DI, or both). The EN’s inability to know what program(s) the client
is participating in makes the EN payment process more difficult because: different pay
documentation is needed; different earnings thresholds must be met to qualify for payment;
and different payments are received depending on the program status of the Ticket client.
Not knowing program status, and not being allowed to obtain that information from the
PROGRAM MANAGER, makes it difficult for the EN to develop expectations regarding
the likelihood that a claim for payment will be accepted.
Concerns and Expectations Regarding Future Success. Despite the challenges and
financial losses experienced to date with TTW, Glick and Glick plans to continue its
participation on a small-scale. The company will keep its “foot in the door” for a while and
see if SSA makes any changes that might improve the profitability of TTW efforts. They do
not believe that TTW will be successful unless something is done about the requirement to
submit earnings information. Interviewees also expressed frustration with the requirement
that benefits be zero before the EN receives payment. Glick and Glick staff have worked
hard to help a beneficiary become employed, but do not receive payment because the client
Appendix B: Provider-Specific Case Study Summaries