Evidence-Based Work Incentive Planning in Partnership with Vocational Rehabilitation

1. Evidence-Based Work Incentive Planning in Partnership with Vocational Rehabilitation Operations Support ManagerSocial Security’s Ticket to Work Program June 18, 2013

2. Presenters • Don Uchida, Executive Director, Utah State Office of Rehabilitation • Jolene Wyler, Director, Utah Work Incentive Planning Services (UWIPS)

3. Learning Objectives • Objective 1: Show how a written Benefits Analysis can have a positive effect on employment and successful closures. • Objective 2: Understand how Work Incentive Planning can enhance vocational rehabilitation (VR) services and closures. • Objective 3: Show how cost reimbursement can be enhanced by Work Incentive Planning.

4. Utah’s Structure • 10.5 Benefits Specialists employed by Vocational Rehabilitation, serving clientele statewide. • 8 - full time Benefits Specialists • 6 of those Benefits Specialists are embedded in Vocational Rehabilitation offices. • 1 Benefits Specialists funded under Department of Workforce Services • 1 FUTURE WIPA funded CWIC/Benefits Specialist • 1 - ½ time trainer/½ time Self Employment Benefits Specialist • 1 – Supervisor with a ½ time caseload • 1 – ½ time Benefits Specialist serving deaf and hard of hearing caseload.

5. Utah’s Structure Continued • UWIPS serves all Social Security beneficiaries, not just VR clients • Approximately 58% of our referrals come from VR. • Approximately 78% of our clientele are VR clients.

6. Benefits of Housing UWIPS Under VR • Better VR closures through increased employment • Post closure UWIPS services • More holistic experience for the client • Uniform services • Quality control • Consistent training • One supervision point • VR is a natural referral source

7. The Impact of a Written Benefits Analysis by the UBPAO/WIPA on Vocational Rehabilitation Clients’ Outcomes February 15, 2011 http://www.usor.utah.gov/bpao-study

8. Purpose • To assess the impact of a written benefits analysis by BPAO on Vocational Rehabilitation clients’ outcomes in terms of: • employment • income • VR closure status Contracted study through Center for Public Policy & Administration at the University of Utah by the Utah State Office of Rehabilitation (USOR)

9. Three Research Questions • Do VR clients that receive a benefits analysis in addition to VR services have better employment outcomes? 2. Do VR clients that receive a benefits analysis in addition to VR services have better earnings? 3. Do VR clients that receive a benefits analysis in addition to VR services have a greater likelihood of a successful VR closure?

10. Sources of Information • To determine answers to the research question information was pulled from: • USOR 911 Data Set • UI Data from the Department of Workforce Services • BPAO records to determine who got an analysis

11. What was measured The following outcome measures were gathered: • Quarterly earnings from UI-covered employment • Weekly earnings reported by USOR at application and closure • Quarterly employment rates from UI • Closure status reported by USOR (successfully employed vs. unsuccessful)

12. Study Sample • VR Clients who were receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and/or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and were closed status 26 and 28 • Closure dates were from October 1, 2004 to September 30, 2006 – limited in order to search • UI data 12 quarters before and after closure. • The total sample was 1,425 (1,271 with no written analysis, 154 with an analysis)

13. Employment Findings • Based on UI data including the entire sample, for the quarter after closure, the group with a written benefits analysis was 15%more likely to be employed than the group that did not receive an analysis (employed means show wages). • For the quarter before application there was no difference between the two groups in employment rates

14. Employment Findings continued • Using a multivariate analysis to try and reduce the impact of other factors the study found that the relationship of a written analysis with employment is positive with an initial increase in the likelihood of employment of 18.4%. This difference slightly declines to 16.7% by the 12th quarter after closure.

16. VR Closure Status Findings The group with an analysis is much more likely to be closed successfully.

17. Earnings Findings • For the quarter after closure, UI data showed that the group that received a benefit analysis on average made $451.59 more per quarter than the group that did not. This is statistically significant. • Closure 911 data showed that the group who received a benefits analysis made, on average, $36.93 more per week at closure than the group that did not receive an analysis. • Both USOR and UI data showed no significant difference between the groups in wages at application, but did show a significant difference in wages at closure

18. Change In Wages • When the sample is narrowed to only those individuals who are employed there is no significant difference between the wages of those people who received the analysis and those who did not (group who got analysis made $143/quarter more than those who did not, higher but not significant enough to be considered statistically significant). • Therefore it appears that the increase in wages seen in the entire group is due to an increased likelihood of employment rather than clients increasing their individual earnings.

19. Summary of Findings • Individuals who receive a benefit analysis are more likely to be employed than those who do not as defined by having Unemployment Insurance (UI) wages and also defined as being closed as successful within the VR program (status 26) • The group who received an analysis did make more money as a whole group to a significant level than those who did not but that is likely due to more individuals being employed

20. Vocational Rehabilitation and other Utah statistics

21. Table 2.13: Employment: Full-Time, Year-Round (FTYR) Gap—Civilians Ages 18 to 64 Years Living in the Community for the United States and States, by Disability Status: 2011 Footnote #1

22. Utah’s VR Numbers Fiscal year 2011

23. Utah’s VR numbers continued Fiscal year 2012

27. Year to Date Report of Clearances Program Counts- Client Rehabilitations SSA, OESP, DESPA Provider Operations Team   Year to Date Report- Fiscal Year 2009 Region: 08 Through the period of 9/30/2009

28. Year to Date Report of Clearances Program Counts-Client Rehabilitations SSA, OESP, DESPA Provider Operations Team Year to Date Report· Fiscal Year 2010 Region: 08 Through the period of 9/30/2010

29. Year to Date Report of Clearances Program Counts- Client Rehabilitations SSA, OESP, DESPA Provider Operations Team Year to Date Report· Fiscal Year 2011 Region: 08 Through the period of 9/30/2011

30. Year to Date Report of Clearances Program Counts- Client Rehabilitations SSA, OESP, DESPA Provider Operations Team  Year to Date Report ·Fiscal Year 2012 Through the period of 9/30/2012

31. Closing Thoughts • Utah was excited to see the positive effect a written Benefits Analysis on employment and closures with Vocational Rehabilitation. • Utah’s program enhances Vocational Rehabilitation services by providing a complementary service to clientele to help them make an informed choice about employment. • Utah’s choice to use Cost Reimbursement funds to pay for it’s Work Incentives Planning program brings extra money back into the VR program through increased successful closures.

32. Comments or Questions? Contact: Don Uchida, Executive Director Utah State Office of Rehabilitation 250 East 500 South P.O. Box 144200 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 duchida@utah.gov 801-538-7530 Jolene Wyler, Director Utah Work Incentive Planning Services 1595 West 500 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 jwyler@utah.gov 801-887-9393

33. PARTNERSHIP PLUS MASSACHUSETTS

34. Partnership Plus“Advantage”

35. Key Objectives • Explore, Develop and Implement a methodology to enhance utilization of the Ticket to Work (TTW) and create partnerships between State VR and Employment Networks (EN) • Encourage existing Community Rehabilitation Providers (CRP’s) to become EN’s, maximizing strengths and resources to provide optimum employment services

36. Program Goals

37. Program Goals Continued • Enhanced services to our consumers • Reduction in Recidivism • Leverage funding • Promote utilization of TTW and EN’s • Maximize cost reimbursement • Strengthen Relationship between MRC and CRPs/ENs

38. Enhanced Services • A Pro-Active approach in the “Hand off” to EN’s • Maintaining a connection with the consumer while in early employment • Ability to act quickly if problems arise • Enrollment in Supported Employment if needed

39. Leverage Funding • Over $200,000 of additional revenue to the provider community • Additional revenue possibility through Ticket to Work Milestone/Outcome payments

40. Reduction in Recidivism • Only four individuals while enrolled in the program had lost their job due to performance issues. • At the inception of the program the agency recidivism rate was 27% • Current recidivism rate is 15% • Those served under PPA – 12.7%

41. Promoting EN Participation • 36 community rehabilitation providers • Seven Employment Networks

42. Maximize Cost Reimbursement • MRC is now exclusively using Cost Reimbursement • Current Cost Reimbursement return $2,372651.42 • 60% increase of revenue from prior year

43. Strengthening Relationships • Shared values • Mutual trust • It is not “Us” and “Them” • Interdependence

44. Part of the Solution • The PPA and the Ticket program is but part of the solution • In-house job placement – Job Placement/Employment Specialist • Better assessment • Work Incentives Planning and Assistance (WIPA)/Benefit Specialist

45. WIPA/Benefit Specialist • Since 2006 • 3,560 served • 912 employed • Average 20 hours a week • Average wage of $12.24 • VR consumers receiving SSDI are 25% more likely to be employed after receiving Benefit Specialist Services

46. “Place and Train” “Build and Implement”

47. Comments or Questions? Contact: James Fratolillo, Director of Statewide Employment Services Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission James.fratolillo@mrc.state.ma.us 617.204.3854