Evaluation of the Ticket to Work Program Initial Evaluation Report

B.37
permits agency budgets to be cut on a month-to-month basis and DRS’ budget was cut
during eight of the 12 months last year. Staff reported that the backlog of Ticket holders has
diminished; most have developed IWPs and are currently receiving services.
At follow-up in August 2003, Oklahoma DRS had 1125 tickets assignments, with 575
designated for milestone plus outcome payments. The agency has received 37 milestone
payments on 21 beneficiaries and 50 outcome payments on 11 beneficiaries. The estimated
service costs for a particular client continue to drive the decision of whether to accept
milestone payment or the traditional cost-reimbursement payment for each individual. DRS
interviewees estimate that the agency spent about $1.2 million on services for its 575
milestone beneficiaries, and has received about $26,000 in TTW revenue thus far. Staff
members project that, in the long run, revenues of $250,000 to $500,000 per year from
milestone payments will be achieved. Although revenues may not equal expenditures on
these clients, DRS would receive no revenue on clients that do not obtain SGA under the
traditional cost reimbursement system. Staff commented that ENs will tend to serve the
“easy cases” and refer individuals with more complex and expensive training needs to the
VR agency; this will not achieve one of the TTW’s goals: to provide individuals with more
significant disabilities a choice in rehabilitation providers. Staff also noted, however, that
more individuals may potentially be served.
Program Administration. DRS staff stated that the Program Manager is sometimes
slow in making Ticket assignments and DRS often begins serving the individual before
receiving confirmation of Ticket assignments. Another problem is that sometimes the
Program Manager informs DRS that the Ticket is unassignable, but does not provide a
reason; e.g., whether the individual has deposited the Ticket with another provider. The
reason for unassignment is critical in determining whether DRS should commence service
provision.
DRS interviewees noted their confusion over whether the beneficiary must sign Form
1365 to formally assign the Ticket to DVR, and whether the date of Ticket assignment is the
date the IPE is signed or the date the Form 1365 is signed. Staff would appreciate formal
SSA policy memoranda on such matters.
DRS continues to use Unemployment Insurance (UI) data to track earnings. Although
these data are three to four months out of date, they provide the information DRS needs to
track earnings. Tracking earnings is no more difficult under the milestone system than the
cost reimbursement system. Staff members have, however, experienced problems submitting
pay stubs for earnings verification. In some cases, the pay stubs are not accepted because
they do not have adequate information; e.g., the dates the beneficiary actually worked in
addition to the date of pay; in another case, payment for placement of an independent
contractor was rejected because he had not yet filed a tax return. Staff members also expend
significant energy breaking down UI quarterly earnings data into monthly earnings. DRS
staff expressed frustration with the amount of time spent in gathering this documentation--
documentation that SSA also gathers to determine benefit payment amounts. DRS staff
suggested that SSA should not reject payment claims based on insufficient documentation,
Appendix B: Provider-Specific Case Study Summaries