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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

18All of the statistics in this section pertain to March 2004 and are based on SSI and DIprogram data matched to an April 2004 extract from SSA’s Ticket MI Universe File. Thesedata differ from those used for the earlier analysis in this chapter, which were extracted inJanuary 2005 from SSA’s new Disability Control File, mostly because of delayed reporting ofTicket assignments. 12 The more recent data show that about 10 percent of in-use Tickets inPhase 1 states in March 2004 had not been reported as assigned as of April 2004. Due totime and resource constraints, we did not update the analysis below. But we have no reasonto think that the relationships reported here would be qualitatively different from those inupdated data; most of the participation rates reported for specific groups would presumablybe on the order of 10 percent higher, however.1. Months Since the Ticket Mail DateOne of the most obvious predictors of assignment is the number of months since theTicket mail date, which confirms findings in the initial evaluation report. As of March 2004,25 months had elapsed since SSA mailed the first Tickets. The beneficiaries included in thatfirst mailing had the highest participation rate, 1.33 percent. Those beneficiaries who weresent Tickets in the previous month had the lowest rate, 0.21 percent. The participation raterises steadily throughout the observed range, showing no evidence of abating in the nearfuture.2. Concurrent BeneficiariesWe previously reported that participation rates for concurrent beneficiaries aresomewhat higher than for DI-only or SSI-only beneficiaries, with the latter two groupsparticipating at about the same rates. The same is true in the current findings: the 13 percentof Phase 1 eligible beneficiaries who were concurrent beneficiaries had a participation rate of1.53 percent in March 2004, compared with 0.93 percent for DI-only beneficiaries and 0.98percent for SSI-only beneficiaries.3. AgeAs with the initial analysis, the current analysis shows that the participation rate ishighest for the youngest eligible beneficiaries and declines with age. This too continues tobe true. In March 2004, the Phase 1 participation rate for the relatively small share ofeligible beneficiaries in the youngest age group, 18 to 24, was 2.79 percent, compared withjust 0.16 percent for the oldest age group, 60 to 64. The participation rate for all those 50 to64 years old is only 0.4 percent.12 The more recent data also incorporate minor changes in (1) the definition of a beneficiary’s state forpurposes of assigning Phase and (2) the classification of beneficiaries by program (i.e., Title).II: Beneficiary Participation in Ticket to Work
194. Primary Impairment CategoryThe initial evaluation report indicated that participation rates vary substantially byprimary impairment category, and the updated findings are very similar. Beneficiary groupsin Phase 1 states with March 2004 participation rates that were at least half a percentagepoint above or below the overall value of 1.0 percent are shown in Table II.2. As indicatedby the statistics in the second column, some of these groups are very large, but others arequite small. Also, while some participation rates are high relative to the overall average, forexample, the rate for those with hearing impairments (5.9 percent) is almost six times theoverall participation rate, they are not high in an absolute sense. Impairment categoriescontaining relatively large numbers of beneficiaries and participation rates above the 1.0percent average rate include schizophrenia/psychoses/neuroses (1.5 percent), majoraffective disorders (1.3 percent), nervous system disorders (1.3 percent), and mentalretardation (1.2 percent). The impairment category with the largest percentage ofbeneficiaries, musculoskeletal (16 percent of beneficiaries) has the third lowest participationrate (0.5 percent).5. Race and EthnicityHispanic beneficiaries participate at a lower rate than other racial/ethnic groups (0.7percent in Phase 1 states), and the rate for those requesting that SSA send them all writteninformation in Spanish is even lower, 0.4 percent. African Americans participate at a higherrate (1.3 percent in Phase 1 states). Participation rates for whites, Asians/Pacific Islanders,and Native Americans are very close to the overall rate.6. Time Since Disability Program EntryAs documented in the initial evaluation report, the participation rate in Phase 1 statesincreased with time from the point of entry into a disability program up through month 24and then is stable through 120 months (10 years) before declining somewhat. A differentfinding emerged from our analysis of more recent data. Participation rates are lower thanaverage for those who have been on the rolls for six or fewer months (.77 percent), the raterises to 1.00 percent for those on the rolls from seven to 12 months, and there is nosubstantial variation with additional months on the rolls.7. State of ResidenceLike our initial analysis, the recent analysis shows that participation rates varysubstantially across the Phase 1 states, although even the highest rate as of March 2004 rate(2.3 percent for Vermont) was low (top of Figure II.6). The lowest rate, 0.4 percent, was inOregon.Participation rates also vary substantially across Phase 2 states (bottom of Figure II.6).As of March 2004, South Dakota had the highest rate (1.6 percent,) and New Hampshirehad the lowest (0.1 percent).II: Beneficiary Participation in Ticket to Work
Page 3 and 4: A CKNOWLEDGMENTSThe Ticket To Work
Page 8 and 9: viiiChapterVI(CONTINUED)PageF. SUMM
Page 10 and 11: xChapterPageAPPENDIX A: TICKET TO W
Page 12 and 13: xiiTableVIII.3IX.1IX.2IX.3IX.4IX.5I
Page 14 and 15: xivFigureIII.5III.6III.7III.8III.9P
Page 16 and 17: xviIX.3EARNINGS OF BENEFICIARIES WI
Page 18 and 19: xviiiMIENBSNPRMOAGPABSSPSUSGASSASSI
Page 20 and 21: xxIn Phase 3, which began in Novemb
Page 22 and 23: xxiigroups of beneficiaries that Co
Page 24 and 25: xxivimprove TTW, therefore, is to f
Page 26 and 27: 2of disability beneficiaries, and i
Page 28 and 29: 4country. Phase 2 began in November
Page 30 and 31: Page Is Intentionally Left Blank to
Page 32 and 33: 8Only a few beneficiary characteris
Page 34 and 35: 10Figure II.2.Participation Rate, b
Page 36 and 37: 12Figure II.4.First Assignments at
Page 38 and 39: 14before Ticket, it is perhaps surp
Page 40 and 41: 16was selected for Phase 3. This ma
Page 44 and 45: Table II.2. Beneficiary Groups with
Page 46 and 47: 22In all Phase 1 and Phase 2 states
Page 48 and 49: 24Figure II.8. Ticket Participation
Page 50 and 51: 26Adjustments for all other charact
Page 52 and 53: 28In general, provider and payment
Page 54 and 55: 30next report, we will conduct more
Page 56 and 57: 32Figure III.2.Living Arrangements
Page 58 and 59: 34• Less likely to have reported
Page 60 and 61: 36Figure III.7.Prevalence of Diffic
Page 62 and 63: 38are more likely than all benefici
Page 64 and 65: 40Table III.1.Income and Program Pa
Page 66 and 67: 42coverage through their own employ
Page 68 and 69: 44sizable percentage of TTW partici
Page 70 and 71: 46Overall, 9 percent of working-age
Page 72 and 73: 48leave the rolls in the next year,
Page 74 and 75: 50next year and in the next five ye
Page 76 and 77: 52in their characteristics, levels
Page 78 and 79: 54percentage points to 3.7 percent.
Page 80 and 81: 56Figure IV.2. Phase 1 Ticket Recip
Page 82 and 83: 58situation described in the preced
Page 84 and 85: 60the end of the follow-up period w
Page 86 and 87: 62Figure IV.6. Average Monthly Bene
Page 88 and 89: Page Is Intentionally Left Blank to
Page 90 and 91: 66ENs were reluctant to expand serv
Page 92 and 93:
68As of July 2004, there were about
Page 94 and 95:
70But most EN representatives saw T
Page 96 and 97:
72Figure V.2. Number of EN Terminat
Page 98 and 99:
74received a total of just about $2
Page 100 and 101:
76Relatively few ENs have received
Page 102 and 103:
78According to their representative
Page 104 and 105:
80Five EN officials recognized that
Page 106 and 107:
82This was particularly true for so
Page 108 and 109:
84• Another EN representative fou
Page 110 and 111:
86• A third EN received 50 calls
Page 112 and 113:
88resolve administrative issues suc
Page 114 and 115:
90• Raise payments for SSI benefi
Page 116 and 117:
92Finally, the real and perceived w
Page 118 and 119:
94efforts to obtain Ticket assignme
Page 120 and 121:
96SSA payments to SVRAs under the T
Page 122 and 123:
98Figure VI.3. Total SSA Payments t
Page 124 and 125:
100assigning their Tickets to ENs (
Page 126 and 127:
102Table VI.1. SVRA Ticket Assignme
Page 128 and 129:
104case, the counselor selects the
Page 130 and 131:
106• Most of the agreements requi
Page 132 and 133:
108needs of SSA beneficiaries and,
Page 134 and 135:
110to the SVRA under the traditiona
Page 136 and 137:
112Tickets each month from November
Page 138 and 139:
114about submitting virtually ident
Page 140 and 141:
116To make EN recruiting efforts mo
Page 142 and 143:
118E. EN ENROLLMENTThe Program Mana
Page 144 and 145:
120beneficiaries who have achieved
Page 146 and 147:
122quarterly basis if they have rec
Page 148 and 149:
124SSA’s approval of systems spec
Page 150 and 151:
Page Is Intentionally Left Blank to
Page 152 and 153:
128have accepted. But even at that
Page 154 and 155:
130For beneficiaries who express an
Page 156 and 157:
132rehabilitation counselors (Burea
Page 158 and 159:
134generated a payment to an EN gen
Page 160 and 161:
136the milestone-outcome payment ge
Page 162 and 163:
138system is used so infrequently t
Page 164 and 165:
140One option is for ENs to try to
Page 166 and 167:
142approximations. Our planned anal
Page 168 and 169:
144Figure IX.1. Ticket-Eligible Ben
Page 170 and 171:
146Table IX.2.TTW Participation Rat
Page 172 and 173:
148Figure IX.3. Earnings of Benefic
Page 174 and 175:
150Compared with other beneficiarie
Page 176 and 177:
152Like all other beneficiaries who
Page 178 and 179:
This kind of mixed success in the e
Page 180 and 181:
C. SVRA PARTICIPATION REMAINS STRON
Page 182 and 183:
serving beneficiaries who are simil
Page 184 and 185:
observe changes in their employment
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Mashaw, Jerry L., and Virginia P. R
Page 190 and 191:
A-2Table A.1 (continued)Time Period
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Table B.1. DefinitionsB-2Variable D
Page 196 and 197:
Table B.1 (continued)B-4Variable De
Page 198 and 199:
Table B.1 (continued)Variable Defin
Page 200 and 201:
B-8Table B.3. Participation Rate by
Page 202 and 203:
B-10C. PARTICIPATION RATES BY BENEF
Page 204 and 205:
Table B.6. Participation Rates by C
Page 206 and 207:
Table B.6 (continued)Group Definiti
Page 208 and 209:
Table B.6 (continued)B-16Group Defi
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
C-2survey. Whenever possible, the i
Page 214 and 215:
C-4given the large number of benefi
Page 216 and 217:
C-6• Young SSI recipients who are
Page 218 and 219:
C-8beneficiary may have had with EN
Page 220 and 221:
C-10Table C.2. Overview of the Nati
Page 222 and 223:
C-12Sample completes (n=1,178) and
Page 224 and 225:
C.14Table C.3 (continued)AllIntervi
Page 226 and 227:
C.16Table C.5. Final Weighted and U
Page 228 and 229:
C.18Table C.7. Sociodemographic Cha
Page 230 and 231:
C.20Table C.9. Health Status (Figur
Page 232 and 233:
C.22Table C.11. Program Participati
Page 234 and 235:
C.24Table C.14. Awareness of TTW (F
Page 236 and 237:
C.26Table C.16. Employment Expectat
Page 238 and 239:
D-2Table D.1. Selected Characterist
Page 240:
D-4information from two pretest int
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?