Statement of Robert Kilbury and Louis Hamer, Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation, Chicago, Illinois

In Illinois there are 60 ENs with 32 ENs having an active agreement with State VR.  Since the Ticket program started two years ago in Illinois we have gone from 73 ENs to 60 ENs now.  Many ENs have stopped taking the Ticket assignment from customers.  Most community based providers have attributed the lack of Tickets accepted due to the payment system. In Illinois we do have an agreement that was developed with cooperation with community providers.  The EN agreement calls for State VR to pay for services and to eventually receive payment back for its cost once the EN receives payment from SSA.  The EN will keep any monies received over State VR's cost.  In most cases it could be a large sum.  Illinois does not ask for any cost reimbursement above what it pays out.

"Transmittal 17" allows State VR to submit the Ticket Registration Form (TRF1365) along with a copy of the signed IPE signature page for assignment when the customer does not sign the TRF1365.  The customer is informed by State VR that by signing the IPE (Plan) they are assigning their Ticket to VR.  In Illinois we only submit in this manner with the customer's approval.  This is no different than when a customer goes to an EN and signs a Individual Work Plan (IWP), they are in essence assigning their Ticket to that EN.  This happens and not all customers are informed they have assigned their Ticket to that EN.  In Illinois over 98% of all Tickets to date have been submitted with customer signature on the TRF1365.

It is very unfair to vilify State VR agencies over the Ticket program.  In Illinois not every customer that comes through the door is a SSA recipient.  The funds captured from SSA reimbursement goes back into the pool to pay the cost for all it’s customers, including SSA recipients.  State VR does indeed continue to be woefully under-funded.  The amount of reimbursement has been steadily shrinking over the last two years with a large reduction expected again this year.

We disagree with the recommendation of eliminating the requirement that there be agreements between ENs and State VR agencies when the EN refers a beneficiary to VR unless SSA allows cost reimbursement for State VR agencies separately from the Ticket program.

Illinois State VR spent significant resources the first year training staff, hiring Ticket operators, setting-up a Ticket Cost Center and meeting with ENs in development of the EN agreement.  We continue to spend large amounts training staff on SSA revisions and communicating with Maximus and customers who have no intent to return to work. This program would be most effective if there were unlimited funding for State VR with some additional funds for ENs.  Since there is no endless trail of money, SSA should not consider changing the system to reward ENs that are able to cherry-pick it's customers.  We must remember that State VR must work with every customer that comes through the door.

Making further changes to provide more incentives to return to work  would benefit customers more.  Give the customer to try to work for a year if they assign there ticket and allow them to keep all their benefits would open the door to more customers making a real attempt to get off benefits, not making ENs rich on the backs of the customer.