Statement of Michael O’Brien, Washington Department of Social and Health Services, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, Lacey, Washington

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Matsui, and members of the House Social Security Subcommittee, I am writing on behalf of Washington State Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) in order to provide written testimony in connection with the hearing on the Social Security Administration’s implementation of the Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program, authorized under the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999.

I am writing in response to the comments made in Mr. Seifert’s testimony under the heading “State VR Agencies, Employment Networks (ENs) and Beneficiaries.” Mr. Seifert’s written testimony states:  “State VR agencies have developed stand-alone, take-it-or-leave-it, one-size-fits-all agreements for ENs in their states.  These agreements all contain one common provision—the full and total repayment of all of VR’s costs out of the EN’s ticket payment by an EN who refers a beneficiary to VR.”

This is not our practice in Washington State. The fact is, we want and need ENs. Washington State has a capacity issue and we believe ENs can assist in addressing this issue.  Our agreements with ENs do not require more than a forty percent reimbursement to DVR on a shared Ticket. We have provided technical support to the local Workforce Development Councils to assist them in becoming Employment Networks.  We are in the process of providing training on Ticket and work incentives to One-Stop staff. We will be holding focus groups this spring with ENs to figure out what else can be done to assist them.

Washington State DVR took an active role a year prior to the phase three roll-out in order to ensure that Ticket was successful in our State. We formed an interagency Ticket Advisory Group whose purpose was to prepare the state for Ticket, to encourage and support the development of Employment Networks, and to ensure that work incentives were understood throughout the system so that customers would take advantage of the incentives. Sixteen of DVR’s staff have gone through the SSA certification to become benefits planners. Washington State DVR developed its own training modeled after the SSA training and has trained one third of its staff in benefits planning.

The Ticket Advisory members also have coordinated numerous joint and solo presentations on Ticket to Work, SSA work incentives, and the Medicare Buy-In program. Washington State DVR sponsored and coordinated two spring conferences on Ticket to Work to encourage EN development. Those conferences were attended by over 400 people. Washington State DVR paid for national experts on Ticket to speak.

Under the leadership of Washington State DVR, this committee developed a Ticket brochure with basic information on Ticket that could be used system wide, as well as a Ticket brochure for transition students. We compiled a list of frequently asked questions which is posted on all partners’ websites. We currently are planning six one-day conferences statewide that will enable customers to better understand Ticket and the related work incentives.

Washington State DVR set up a toll-free line that anyone with a Ticket question can call. What we are finding is that, as a state, there is a serious problem of Ticket holders having nowhere to use their Ticket. Few ENs in our state are accepting Tickets and many Ticket holders are very frustrated. Unfortunately, DVR cannot be the answer because we are in “order of selection” and have a long waiting list.

Mr. Seifert, in his testimony, faults VR agencies for delaying or failing to assign a beneficiary’s Ticket, resulting in the beneficiary being subjected to a Continuing Disability Review (CDR). I would like to state that this does not occur in  Washington State. We have made it very clear to Ticket holders and DVR staff that a Ticket is assigned only when the 1365 form and the Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE) is signed. We have held four statewide trainings on the Ticket program, and 31 additional trainings at every DVR office in the state to insure our staff understands when and how a ticket is assigned. 

However, there is a problem. Transmittal 17 states that a beneficiary’s signature on the IPE indicates that the beneficiary has decided to use the ticket to obtain services from the State VR agency, if the ticket is assignable. This effectively takes away any choice from the individual. If ticket holders sign the IPE – which must occur in order to receive services – then according to TM 17 they have assigned their ticket.

WashingtonState has chosen to submit only Tickets that the beneficiary has deliberately assigned to us. I would suggest that the problem is with TM 17, not with public rehabilitation.

Thank you for the opportunity to share information about Ticket implementation and issues in Washington State.