12.07.2015 Views

Evaluation of the Ticket to Work Program, Implementation ...

Evaluation of the Ticket to Work Program, Implementation ...

Evaluation of the Ticket to Work Program, Implementation ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

100assigning <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>Ticket</strong>s <strong>to</strong> ENs (Kregel and Revell 2003). The Phase 2 SVRAs weinterviewed, however, were less likely <strong>to</strong> establish call centers or extensive marketingprograms. They also dedicated fewer resources <strong>to</strong> obtaining <strong>Ticket</strong> assignments frombeneficiaries already on <strong>the</strong>ir caseloads, so-called “pipeline cases,” that receive <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>Ticket</strong>after signing an Individual Plan for Employment (IPE) with an SVRA. Their approach <strong>to</strong><strong>Ticket</strong> holders—which may be correlated with <strong>the</strong> reduced participation rates in <strong>the</strong> Phase 2states described in Chapter II—could be a result <strong>of</strong> at least three fac<strong>to</strong>rs. First, <strong>the</strong>se Phase2 SVRAs may have learned from <strong>the</strong> experiences <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Phase 1 states, realizing that existingclients were unlikely <strong>to</strong> assign <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>Ticket</strong>s elsewhere. Second, caseworkers may have come<strong>to</strong> see <strong>Ticket</strong> assignment merely as an administrative step that would not affect <strong>the</strong> servicesdelivered <strong>to</strong> pipeline clients. Third, it could reflect longstanding (pre-TTW) differences in<strong>the</strong>ir approach <strong>to</strong> dealing with clients; one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> criteria for including states in Phases 1 and3 was that <strong>the</strong>y were more “market proactive,” <strong>the</strong>reby causing Phase 2 SVRAs <strong>to</strong> appearless active as compared with <strong>the</strong>ir Phase 1 counterparts.Figure VI.4. Percentage <strong>of</strong> Competitively Employed SSA Cases Versus non-SSA Cases,FY 1997–200335%34%% Competitively Employed33%32%31%30%29%28%27%26%1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003SSANon-SSASource: RSA 911 (Case Service Reports) Public Use File.Recent interviews with eight Phase 1 and Phase 2 SVRAs also reveal that <strong>Ticket</strong>assignments from new clients—those who receive a <strong>Ticket</strong> before signing an IPE with anSVRA—continue <strong>to</strong> be a controversial issue. Transmittal 17 <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> “Social SecurityProvider’s Handbook” (SSA 2002) allows SVRAs <strong>to</strong> submit a <strong>Ticket</strong> Assignment Form(Form 1365) without <strong>the</strong> beneficiary’s signature—that is, without his/her express consent—as long as <strong>the</strong> SVRA in question also submits <strong>the</strong> first and last pages <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> IPE signed byboth <strong>the</strong> beneficiary and an SVRA representative. Six <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> eight SVRAs we interviewedVI: State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency Participation in <strong>Ticket</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>Work</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!