NDSS & NDSC Comments on Proposed
Regulations for the Ticket to Work and
                   Self-Sufficiency Program - 20 CFR Part 411,
Dec. 28, 2000  February 28, 2001

The National Down Syndrome Congress (NDSC) and National
                 Down Syndrome Society (NDSS) are organizations advocating
                 for quality services and supports for individuals with Down
                 syndrome. These organizations are dedicated to improving the
                 availability of and accessibility to a full range of opportunities and
                 resources that meet individual and family needs and to ensure
                 that all people with Down syndrome have the opportunity to reach
                 their full potential. The organizations welcome the opportunity to
                 comment on the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM)
                 published in the Federal Register on December 29, 2000 by the
                 Social Security Administration (SSA).

                 According to the Social Security Administration, in its Notice of
                 Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) published on December 29,
                 2000 in the Federal Register, the proposed rules are intended to
                 expand the options available for Social Security disability
                 beneficiaries and disabled or blind SSI beneficiaries to access
                 vocational rehabilitation services, employment services, and
                 other support services that are necessary for such beneficiaries
                 to obtain, regain or maintain employment that reduces their
                 dependency on cash assistance. The individual holding a ticket
                 may assign the ticket to any employment network (EN) (i.e.,
                 service provider) of their choice that is willing to accept the
                 assignment. [Section 1148(b) and Section 1148(f) of the Social
                 Security Act] The employment network must ensure that services
                 provided under the Program are provided under appropriate
                 individual work plans developed and implemented in partnership
                 with each individual receiving such services. [Section 1148(g) of
                 the Social Security Act]. The Commissioner pays the employment
                 network in accordance with either the outcome payment system
                 or the outcome-milestone payment system.

                 The Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act
                 (TWWIIA) contains exciting new opportunities for individuals with
                 disabilities to work and keep their important health care
                 coverage. We appreciate the effort that SSA put into developing
                 these proposed regulations to implement the Ticket to Work
                 program. However, we are concerned that individuals who are
                 harder to serve due to more intensive support needs or other
                 factors  will not be served under the Ticket to Work program as
                 currently proposed in the NPRM. This is, in part, because of the
                 financial disincentives inherent in the outcome milestone payment
                 system in the NPRM. NDSC and NDSS believe that Congress
                 intended to make this program available for all individuals with
                 disabilities receiving SSI and SSDI, including individuals who
                 have intensive support needs. The regulations also state that the
                 Commissioner's intent in developing the proposed rules is [that]
                 ... the expansion of options available to obtain these services will
                 provide beneficiaries with real choices in getting the services they
                 need to obtain, regain, or maintain employment. Unfortunately, the
                 outcome-milestone payment system and the extensive
                 requirements for service providers (ENs) outlined in the NPRM
                 make it highly unlikely that choices for beneficiaries will expand
                 under the proposed rule. Below is a discussion of our most
                 serious concerns and recommendations to address these
                 concerns.

                 Outcome-Milestone Payment System (Section 411.500-598)

                 The law and the proposed regulations offer two methods to
                 compensate providers for an individual's success at obtaining
                 and keeping employment. This is accomplished by paying  the
                 EN a portion of the average cash benefits that would no longer be
                 paid to the individual because he or she has maintained
                 employment at the substantial gainful activity (SGA) level for a
                 predetermined period of time.

                 The first method is the outcome payment system which pays a
                 provider during a period of 60 months in which benefits are not
                 paid to the beneficiary because he/she is earning above the
                 substantial gainful activity level [SGA].

                 The second method is the outcome-milestone payment system.
                 This was designed, ostensibly, to provide incentives for
                 employment networks to provide supports to individuals with
                 more intensive support needs and to expand the number and type
                 of service providers. However, the way in which the
                 outcome-milestone system is designed in the proposed
                 regulations, does not provide for adequate reimbursement,
                 especially to ENs that provide supports for individuals who are
                 harder to serve and have more substantial support needs.

                 There are additional issues of concern that arise from the
                 differences between SSI and SSDI. First, the average SSI and
                 SSDI cash benefits are substantially different, meaning both the
                 outcome and outcome-milestone payments will be substantially
                 lower for individuals on SSI. Secondly, since the 1619 program
                 allows for a gradual reduction in SSI cash benefits, reducing the
                 cash benefit one dollar for every two dollars earned, the SSI
                 beneficiary must earn far more than the SSDI beneficiary before
                 entirely leaving the rolls and triggering payments to ENs. These
                 two provisions will serve as significant disincentives to providers
                 who will by-pass SSI recipients to accept tickets first from SSDI
                 beneficiaries.

                 Recommendation

                 SSA should undertake the following actions in regard to the
                 outcome-milestone payment system:

                     Rewrite the regulations and design the milestones in a
                     manner that will attract providers to serve people in need of
                     greater supports. To do this, SSA should consult with states
                     that have designed similar systems and advocates familiar
                     with the needs of individuals who are harder to serve.
                     Based on information from current milestone and individual
                     choice systems of employment services, increase the
                     number and amounts of the payments during the milestone
                     phase, with the remainder paid to the provider over the
                     five-year period of employment.
                     At a minimum, milestone payments should begin with the
                     completion of an Individual Work Plan and a payment
                     should also be made for job placement (the first day on the
                     job).
                     Establish a system of milestones that is flexible enough to
                     meet the needs of individuals with high support needs and
                     to provide sufficient front-end funding to enable providers to
                     serve and support them.
                     In addition to making the above changes to the "standard"
                     milestone payment system described in the NPRM, create
                     a new "Tier 2" individualized milestone option for the harder
                     to serve, using the individualized planning process to
                     determine which milestone tier would best achieve
                     employment outcomes for the individual:
                         Consult with experts in the field, such as those in
                         Massachusetts and Oklahoma, who are currently
                         using an individualized milestone approach in
                         designing this Tier 2 system.
                         Utilizing the Individual Work Plan (IWP) process,
                         clearly define the milestones of achievement and a
                         value assigned to each milestone for that individual,
                         with oversight by the Program Manager (PM).
                         Customize milestones, individualized to the specific
                         needs of each individual for whom the first tier is
                         determined inappropriate.
                         Establish the total amount that can be paid by the
                         outcome-milestone payment system at 39.9%, the
                         maximum amount allowed by the statute.

                 Equity Study

                 In addition to the recommendations outlined above that would
                 help ensure equity for those who are harder to serve, the Report
                 on the Adequacy of Incentives required in Section (101h)(5)(c) of
                 the Act has been identified as a key initiative to assure that
                 people who are harder to serve are able to participate fully in the
                 Ticket program. The four groups of people identified in the law
                 whose circumstances must be addressed, through this equity
                 study include: people with a need for ongoing supports and
                 services; people with a need for high-cost accommodation;
                 people who earn a sub-minimum wage; and people who work
                 and receive partial cash benefits.

                 Recommendation

                 SSA must consult with experts knowledgeable about and
                 experienced in meeting the needs of those individuals, as well as
                 advocates for those individuals, in development of the study. SSA
                 should involve those experts and advocates as well as
                 researchers who are knowledgeable about individuals who are
                 harder to serve in developing the research questions, determining
                 where to look for information, creating and finalizing methodology
                 and analyzing and presenting results for the equity study report.
                 The individualized milestone approach described previously will
                 provide valuable information for this important study which should
                 begin as soon as possible. NDSS and NDSC would be pleased
                 to provide assistance to SSA in the development and
                 implementation of this study.

                 Ticket to Work Program Dispute Resolution B Disputes
                 Between Beneficiaries and Employment Networks (EN)
                 (Sec. 411.600)

                 The dispute resolution process has three steps: (a) The
                 beneficiary can seek a solution through the EN's internal
                 grievance procedures. (b) If the EN's internal grievance
                 procedures do not result in an agreeable solution, either the
                 beneficiary or the EN may seek a resolution from the PM. (c) If
                 either the beneficiary or the EN is dissatisfied with the resolution
                 proposed by the PM, either party may request a decision from us.

                 This process does not present an opportunity for the individual to
                 present his or her position on the disputed issue(s). The
                 proposed rule indicates that, when the Program Manager is
                 asked to review a dispute, the PM is to contact the EN for all
                 materials but is not required to contact the beneficiary. The PM
                 would receive only a summary of the individual's position,
                 prepared by the individual (or representative) but conveyed by the
                 EN.

                 In addition, if either the individual or EN asks SSA to review the
                 PM's proposal to resolve the dispute, there is no clear
                 requirement for SSA to consider the individual's (or the EN's) own
                 view of the dispute. It appears that the PM would prepare all
                 materials for SSA's review. Finally, SSA's decision is considered
                 final and, therefore, not subject to further review.

                 Recommendation

                 The regulations should be clarified to ensure that the individual
                 has the opportunity at all steps in the process to present his/her
                 own version of the dispute, including reasons for rejecting each
                 proposed solution.

                 Qualifications for Employment Networks (Sec. 411.315)

                 The specific criteria that an entity must meet to qualify as an EN
                 include: (1)(i) Using staff who are qualified under applicable
                 certification, licensing, or registration standards that apply to their
                 profession; or (ii) Using staff that are otherwise qualified based
                 on education or experience, such as by using staff with a college
                 degree in a related field such as vocational counseling, human
                 relations, teaching or psychology; and (2) Providing medical and
                 related health services under the formal supervision of persons
                 licensed to prescribe or supervise the provision of these services
                 in the State in which the services are performed. (c) An entity
                 must have applicable certificates, licenses, or other credentials if
                 such documentation is required by State law to provide VR
                 services, employment services or other support services in the
                 State.

                 A major objective of the Ticket to Work program is to provide an
                 alternative to services provided (or not provided) by traditional
                 service providers, the state vocational rehabilitation agencies and
                 traditional rehabilitation models. In order to provide a viable
                 alternative to this system, however, SSA must clarify the
                 regulations so that they are not interpreted to mean credentialing
                 and licensing is required of all ENs. SSA must also make it clear
                 that such standards must be met only where required for licensed
                 professionals. In addition, SSA should avoid giving the
                 impression that all employees or contractors of ENs have to be
                 licensed or credentialed. The determining factor must be whether
                 the entity is capable of successfully providing the service agreed
                 to by the EN and the beneficiary.

                 The EN requirements are currently too complex and bureaucratic,
                 and, as written, would stifle the development of new,
                 non-traditional, creative service providers, severely limit the
                 involvement of competent businesses and severely limit the
                 choices of individuals.

                 Opportunities should exist, under the proper circumstances, for
                 families or personal support networks to become employment
                 networks. Questions have arisen about whether families or a
                 "circle of friends" could serve as an EN. If the family or group of
                 friends can meet the requirements of an EN and/or be a "service
                 provider" that is part of an EN, they should be able to serve this
                 function.

                 Recommendation

                 The regulations should be greatly simplified and requirements for
                 EN's streamlined. The regulations should also clarify that ENs are
                 not be limited by licensing or certification criteria.

                 One Ticket Per Period of Disability (Section 411.125[b])

                 The proposed rule refers to one ticket during any one period of
                 disability. Unfortunately, when this is combined with SSI's 1619[b]
                 program and the provision for expedited reinstatement of benefits
                 that became effective January 1, 2001, it appears to preclude
                 eligibility for new tickets in the future since the individual is
                 "reinstated" to the benefit rolls under the original disability
                 designation. To ensure that this limitation is not read to mean one
                 ticket per individual's lifetime, clarification is needed from the
                 Social Security Administration (SSA).

                 Additionally, the limitation of one ticket per period of disability has
                 an adverse impact on individuals who have used a substantial
                 portion of a ticket and then must return to the disability program.
                 After a reasonable time period, an individual should have the
                 opportunity to obtain a  new ticket. Otherwise, people with very
                 severe disabilities will have only one chance for success, a result
                 we believe is contrary to Congressional intent.

                 Recommendation

                 No limits should be placed on the number of Tickets a person can
                 receive over the course of a lifetime, as long as a person is not
                 using more than one at a time. Limiting the number of Tickets
                 ignores the fact that disabilities are lifelong.

                 General Recommendation

                 Because of the serious problems inherent in the system under the
                 current regulations and because the regulations would have a
                 discriminatory impact on a large number of individuals, SSA
                 should not implement the regulations until these issues are
                 satisfactorily resolved. The Request for Proposals to become
                 EN's and tickets should not be issued until the issues raised
                 above   are resolved and the regulations finalized.




The Job Accomodation Network (JAN) is a free consulting service of the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities that provides consultation about job accomodation and the employability of people with functional limitations.  Anyone may cal  JAN for information.  The mission of JAN is to assist in the hiring, retraining, retention or advancement of persons with disabilities.  Phone:  800-526-7234 or 800-ADA-WORK (v/tty), or E-Mail at:  jan@jan,icdi.wvu.edu.


Best Buddies
This program is an international one whose mission is to provide opportunities for socialization and employment for people with mental retardation.  Founded in 1987 by Anthony Kennedy Shriver.  Volunteers in high schools and colleges are matched in a one-to-one mutually enriching friendship with a person with mental retardation.  Individuals with disabilities are referred to the program by a variety of host site facilities including group homes, day programs and high schools.  Check your local high school and college.  If they don't have this program encourage them to begin one.  There are also a citizens program and a job program.  Contact the Los Angeles, Ca. administrator at 310-829-8558.

E-MAIL at: robeng@ix.netcom.com