[Federal Register: December 28, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 249)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67369-67442]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28de01-23]
[[Page 67369]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Social Security Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
20 CFR Part 411
The Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program; Final Rule
Request for Public Suggestions on Ways to Support Youth With Disability
in Transition to Adulthood; Notice
[[Page 67370]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
20 CFR Part 411
RIN 0960-AF11
The Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program
AGENCY: Social Security Administration (SSA).
ACTION: Final rules.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are publishing final regulations implementing the Ticket to
Work and Self-Sufficiency Program (Ticket to Work program) authorized
by the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999. The
Ticket to Work program provides beneficiaries with disabilities with
expanded options for access to employment services, vocational
rehabilitation services, or other support services. We will pay the
providers of those services after the beneficiaries achieve certain
levels of work.
DATES: These regulations are effective January 28, 2002.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Georgia E. Myers, Regulations Officer,
Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD
21235, E-mail to regulations@ssa.gov, or telephone (410) 965-3632 or
TTY (410) 966-5609 for information about these regulations. For
information on eligibility or filing for benefits, call our national
toll-free number, 1-800-772-1213 or TTY 1-800-325-0778, or visit our
Internet Web site, SSA Online, at www.ssa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Organization on Disability/Harris Survey of 1998 found
that only 29 percent of individuals with disabilities were working
full- or part-time. From calendar year 1986 to calendar year 1999, the
number of individuals receiving disability benefits rose 80 percent,
with about half receiving Social Security disability benefits and half
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Among the factors
contributing to this increase were outreach efforts of the Social
Security Administration (SSA) and the aging of the work force. The
Federal government spent $51.3 billion on Social Security disability
benefits in calendar year 1999, and $22.9 billion on SSI. Many States
use State funds to supplement the benefits of SSI beneficiaries.
According to the U.S. General Accounting Office, less than one
percent of Social Security disability and SSI beneficiaries leave the
Social Security and SSI rolls each year as a result of paid employment.
Of those who leave, about one-third return within three years. If just
one-half of one percent of the current Social Security disability and
SSI beneficiaries were to cease receiving benefits as a result of
engaging in self-supporting employment, savings in cash benefits would
total $3.5 billion over the work-life of those individuals.
These final regulations are intended to expand the options
available for Social Security disability beneficiaries and disabled or
blind SSI beneficiaries to access vocational rehabilitation (VR)
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 benefits. We expect
that the expansion of these options and the creation of new work
incentives in the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of
1999 (Public Law 106-170) will remove some of the disincentives that
many beneficiaries with disabilities face when they attempt to work or,
if already working, continue working or increase their work effort. If
more beneficiaries with disabilities engage in self-supporting
employment, the net result will be a reduction in the Social Security
and SSI disability rolls and savings to the Social Security Trust Fund
and general revenues.
Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999
On December 17, 1999, the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives
Improvement Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-170) became law.
In section 2(b) of Public Law 106-170, the Congress states that
this legislation has the following four basic purposes:
--To provide health care and employment preparation and placement
services to individuals with disabilities that will enable those
individuals to reduce their dependence on cash benefit programs.
--To encourage States to adopt the option of allowing individuals with
disabilities to purchase Medicaid coverage that is necessary to enable
such individuals to maintain employment.
--To provide individuals with disabilities the option of maintaining
Medicare coverage while working.
--To establish a ``Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program'' that
allows Social Security disability and disabled or blind SSI
beneficiaries to seek the employment services, vocational
rehabilitation services, and other support services needed to obtain,
regain, or maintain employment and reduce their dependence on cash
benefit programs.
Section 101(a) of Public Law 106-170 amended Part A of title XI of
the Social Security Act (the Act) by adding a new section 1148, The
Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program (Ticket to Work program).
The purpose of the Ticket to Work program is to expand the universe of
service providers available to beneficiaries with disabilities who are
seeking employment services, vocational rehabilitation services, and
other support services to assist them in obtaining, regaining and
maintaining self-supporting employment.
The Social Security Administration is required to develop the
regulations necessary to implement section 1148 of the Act, as well as
certain other amendments to the Act made by Public Law 106-170, and to
provide details regarding the Ticket to Work program. Section 101(e) of
Public Law 106-170 requires the Commissioner of Social Security (the
Commissioner) to prescribe such regulations as are necessary to
implement the amendments made by section 101. We are prescribing these
regulations to address a number of areas where specific policy
decisions were left to the discretion of the Commissioner.
Under the Ticket to Work program, the Commissioner may issue
tickets to Social Security disability beneficiaries and disabled and
blind SSI beneficiaries. Each beneficiary will have the option of using
his or her ticket to obtain services from a provider known as an
employment network (EN). The beneficiary will choose the EN, and the EN
will provide employment services, vocational rehabilitation services,
and other support services to assist the beneficiary in obtaining,
regaining and maintaining self-supporting employment. ENs will also be
able to choose whom they serve. Beneficiaries issued a ticket also will
have the option of taking the ticket to their State vocational
rehabilitation agency for services.
The Commissioner's intent in publishing these final regulations for
the Ticket to Work program is to allow service providers that have
traditionally provided employment services, vocational rehabilitation
services and other support services, as well as other types of
entities, to qualify as ENs and serve beneficiaries with disabilities
under the program. The expansion of options available to obtain these
services will provide beneficiaries with real choices in getting the
services they
[[Page 67371]]
need to obtain, regain, or maintain employment.
Public Education Forums and Conferences
Immediately following passage of Public Law 106-170, we began
working with the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services,
Education, and Labor, as well as the Presidential Task Force on the
Employment of Adults with Disabilities, the President's Committee on
Employment of People with Disabilities, and the National Council on
Disability. These Federal partners joined together to plan and conduct
a series of public education forums. The purpose of the forums was to
increase the awareness of public disability programs and programs
designed to help individuals with disabilities start or return to work
among individuals with disabilities, their families and
representatives, service providers, advocates and State agencies. The
forums focused on Federal and State employment-related policies and
programs for people with disabilities.
Forums were held in eleven major cities across the country. Those
cities were Baltimore, Maryland (December 12, 1999); Kansas City,
Missouri (February 2, 2000); Durham, North Carolina (March 9, 2000);
Phoenix, Arizona (March 30, 2000); New York, New York (April 6, 2000);
Austin, Texas (May 17, 2000); Seattle, Washington (June 13, 2000);
Worcester, Massachusetts (June 26, 2000); Chicago, Illinois (August 1,
2000); Harrisburg, Pennsylvania (August 15, 2000); and Denver, Colorado
(September 13-14, 2000).
Representatives from many national and community-based
organizations participated in these forums, including the SSI
Coalition, Virginia Commonwealth University, Disability Rights
Education and Defense Fund, the National Brain Injury Association,
Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities, Robert Wood Johnson
Foundation, National Council on Independent Living, Capstone Group, as
well as State representatives from the Developmental Disabilities
Councils, the State Independent Living Councils, and the Governors'
Committees on Employment of People with Disabilities.
The forums provided participants with both information and an
opportunity for discussion. Topics included: SSA customer services and
work incentives; State health care systems and models; and employment
initiatives of the Departments of Education, Labor, and Health and
Human Services.
The forums were also used as an opportunity to share information
about Public Law 106-170 and conduct exploratory discussions about
policy issues relating to the implementation of the provisions in the
legislation that were left to the Commissioner to interpret. New models
where State and local systems are working together to serve their
common customers with disabilities were highlighted.
SSA representatives were also involved in meetings and conferences
on the national, regional, State, and local levels. These included SSA-
sponsored forums in Chicago, San Francisco, Dallas, Denver, and
Philadelphia conducted in January and February 2000, which focused on
the Ticket to Work program. At these meetings and conferences, SSA
representatives made presentations on Public Law 106-170, facilitating
discussion and obtaining recommendations that were considered in
developing the provisions of the Ticket to Work program that were
addressed in our proposed rules.
SSA's Programs for Rehabilitation Services Prior to Implementation
of the Ticket to Work Program
In titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act, Congress provided
that we promptly refer individuals applying for or determined eligible
for Social Security disability benefits or SSI benefits based on
disability or blindness to State vocational rehabilitation (VR)
agencies for necessary rehabilitation services. Under the statute and
by regulations, if a State VR agency does not serve a beneficiary whom
we referred, we may use other public or private agencies,
organizations, institutions or individuals to provide services. Under
our regulations, these other providers of services are known as
alternate participants. We are authorized under the Act to pay State VR
agencies and alternate participants for the reasonable and necessary
costs of services provided to Social Security disability beneficiaries
and disabled and blind SSI beneficiaries under specific circumstances.
The most frequent circumstance permitting payment under the Act is when
the services provided result in the beneficiary performing substantial
gainful activity (SGA) for a period of at least nine continuous months.
These programs for referral and reimbursement for VR services are
provided for in sections 222(a) and (d) and sections 1615(a), (d), and
(e) of the Act.
Section 101(b) of Public Law 106-170 makes a number of conforming
amendments to the Act, which require amendments to existing regulations
that implement these statutory provisions. As we gradually implement
the Ticket to Work program in States selected by the Commissioner, the
provisions of the Act for referring beneficiaries to State VR agencies
will cease to be in effect in those States as provided in sections
101(b), (c) and (d) of Public Law 106-170. Additionally, the use of
alternate participants under the title II and title XVI vocational
rehabilitation reimbursement programs will be phased out in the States
as the Ticket to Work program is implemented, as authorized under
section 101(d)(5) of Public Law 106-170.
Section 101(b) of Public Law 106-170 also repealed sections 222(b)
and 1615(c) of the Act, under which the Commissioner was authorized to
impose sanctions (i.e. make deductions from Social Security disability
benefits or suspend SSI benefits) with respect to any beneficiary who
refused, without good cause, to accept rehabilitation services made
available by a State VR agency or an alternate participant.
The proposed rules to implement these statutory changes will be
published in the Federal Register at a later date.
Section 101(b) of Public Law 106-170 also amends sections 225(b)
and 1631(a)(6) of the Act under which SSA is authorized to continue
disability or blindness benefit payments to individuals who recover
medically while participating in a program of vocational rehabilitation
services approved by the Commissioner if the Commissioner determines
that continuation in or completion of the program will increase the
likelihood that the individual will be permanently removed from the
disability or blindness benefit rolls. Section 101(b) of Public Law
106-170 amends these sections of the Act by striking ``a program of
vocational rehabilitation services'' and inserting ``a program
consisting of the Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program under
section 1148 or another program of vocational rehabilitation services,
employment services, or other support services''. The proposed rules to
implement this expanded definition will be published in the Federal
Register at a later date.
We will also publish at a later date in the Federal Register the
rules for implementing section 112 of Public Law 106-170, Expedited
Reinstatement of Disability Benefits.
General Goals of the Ticket to Work Program
The Ticket to Work program will enhance the range of choices
available
[[Page 67372]]
to Social Security disability and disabled and blind SSI beneficiaries
when they are seeking employment services, VR services and other
support services to obtain, regain or maintain self-supporting
employment. The coordinated and interrelated public policy embodied in
various provisions of Public Law 106-170 will remove several
disincentives to employment faced by beneficiaries with disabilities.
The Ticket to Work program will increase beneficiaries' access to
public and private providers to obtain employment services, VR
services, and other support services. As a result, the Ticket to Work
program, together with other provisions of Public Law 106-170, should
increase the number of beneficiaries who increase their work effort and
leave the Social Security or SSI disability rolls due to income from
employment.
In addition to providing the increased opportunity for these
beneficiaries to obtain services when they seek employment, Public Law
106-170 may result in substantial savings for the Federal government
and State governments. Not only should there be an increase in the
number of beneficiaries leaving the Social Security and SSI disability
rolls due to work or earnings, some individuals will secure work with
employers who offer group health coverage, thereby reducing Medicaid
and Medicare expenses. Earned income should also yield tax receipts
while reducing expenses in Social Security disability and disabled and
blind SSI benefits, food stamps, HUD housing rent subsidies, and
certain veterans benefits. Improved employment rates of individuals
with disabilities should increase the independence of such individuals
and strengthen our communities and workforce.
Ticket to Work Program
Section 1148 of the Act, which was added by section 101(a) of
Public Law 106-170, directs the Commissioner of Social Security to
establish a Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program. Section
1148(b) of the Act authorizes the Commissioner to issue a ticket to
disabled beneficiaries. Beneficiaries may choose among public or
private service providers that have been approved by SSA to function as
ENs under the program to obtain employment services, vocational
rehabilitation services, or other support services to assist them in
obtaining, regaining or maintaining employment that will reduce their
dependence on cash benefits. Beneficiaries will also have the option of
choosing to obtain services from their State VR agency. The overall
purpose of the Ticket to Work program is to expand the universe of
options available to beneficiaries with disabilities for obtaining such
services.
Section 101(d) of Public Law 106-170 requires the Commissioner to
implement the Ticket to Work program in graduated phases at phase-in
sites selected by the Commissioner. This is to permit a thorough
evaluation of the program and ensure that the most effective methods
are in place for full implementation of the program. This section also
provides that the Ticket to Work program should be available in every
State not later than 2004.
SSA has decided that the Ticket to Work program will be implemented
in the following manner:
During Phase I of the Ticket to Work program, we will distribute
tickets to eligible beneficiaries in the following States: Arizona,
Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, New York,
Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Vermont and Wisconsin. We intend to
implement this phase upon the effective date of these regulations.
During Phase II of the Ticket to Work program, we will distribute
tickets to eligible beneficiaries in the following States: Alaska,
Arkansas, Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New
Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and
in the District of Columbia. We intend to implement this phase in
calendar year 2002.
During Phase III of the Ticket to Work program, we will distribute
tickets to eligible beneficiaries in the following States: Alabama,
California, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Washington,
West Virginia, Wyoming, as well as in American Samoa, Guam, the
Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. We intend
to implement this phase in calendar year 2003.
Section 1148(d)(1) of the Act authorizes the Commissioner to
conduct a competitive bidding process and enter into an agreement with
one or more organizations to serve as a Program Manager (PM) to assist
SSA in administering the Ticket to Work program.
The PM will recruit and recommend for selection by the Commissioner
ENs for service under the program; monitor all ENs serving in the
geographic areas covered under the PM's agreement to ensure that
adequate choices of services are made available to beneficiaries;
assure that payment by the Commissioner to ENs is warranted; facilitate
access by beneficiaries to ENs; ensure the availability of adequate
services; and ensure that sufficient ENs are available and that each
beneficiary under the program has reasonable access to employment
services, vocational rehabilitation services, and other support
services.
Section 1148(d)(4) of the Act directs the Commissioner to select
and enter into agreements with service providers that are willing to
function as ENs and assume responsibility for the coordination and
delivery of employment services, vocational rehabilitation services,
and other support services to beneficiaries with disabilities under the
Ticket to Work program. A beneficiary with a ticket may assign his or
her ticket to any provider that is serving as an EN under the Ticket to
Work program and is willing to accept the assignment. Beneficiaries who
are issued a ticket also will have the option of taking the ticket to
their State VR agency for services.
Section 101(e) of Public Law 106-170 requires the Commissioner to
prescribe such regulations as are necessary to implement the amendments
made by section 101 of this legislation. These final regulations
address those areas which must be regulated in order to implement the
Ticket to Work program. Additional regulations necessary for the
ongoing implementation of the program will be published as proposed
rules in the Federal Register at a later date. For example, proposed
performance measures to be used in conducting periodic reviews as
necessary to provide for effective quality assurance in the provision
of services by ENs will need to be developed and published in the
Federal Register for comment.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
We published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal
Register on December 28, 2000 (65 FR 82844) proposing rules to
implement the Ticket to Work program. We provided the public 60 days to
submit comments. The comment period closed February 26, 2001. We
received comments from over 400 commenters. We discuss the comments we
received on the NPRM and provide our responses to the comments later in
this preamble under ``Public Comments on the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking.'' A summary of the public comments is available on the
Internet at the SSA Office of Employment Support Programs' Work Site at
http://www.ssa.gov/work.
[[Page 67373]]
As we explain below, in these final regulations, we are making a
number of changes from the proposed rules in response to public
comments. As suggested in a number of these comments, we are also
making other changes in the interest of improved clarity, consistency,
and improved organization.
Final Regulations
We are adding a new part 411 to chapter III of title 20 of the Code
of Federal Regulations to provide the regulations for the Ticket to
Work program. The new part 411 is divided into the following subparts.
Subpart A--Introduction
Subpart A of these regulations provides an introduction to the
regulations in the new part 411. Section 411.100 provides an overview
of the regulations in part 411. Section 411.105 describes the purpose
of the Ticket to Work program. Section 411.110 explains that the Ticket
to Work program will be implemented in graduated phases in sites around
the country as required by section 101(d) of Public Law 106-170.
Section 411.115 provides definitions of terms used in part 411. In the
final rules, we have reorganized the definitions of terms in
Sec. 411.115 to place the terms in alphabetical order. In final
Sec. 411.115(m) (proposed Sec. 411.115(i)), we have clarified the
definition of State vocational rehabilitation agency to indicate that
in those States that have one agency that provides VR services to non-
blind individuals and another agency that provides services to blind
individuals, the term ``state vocational rehabilitation agency'' or
``state VR agency'' refers to either State agency. In addition, we have
expanded Sec. 411.115 in the final rules to provide definitions of the
terms ``employment network'' or ``EN,'' ``individual work plan'' or
``IWP,'' ``individualized plan for employment'' or ``IPE,'' ``program
manager'' or ``PM,'' and ``ticket.''
Subpart B--Tickets Under the Ticket to Work Program
Subpart B of these regulations describes what a ticket is and
explains who is eligible to receive a ticket.
Section 411.120 explains that a ticket is a document that provides
evidence of the Commissioner's agreement to pay an EN or State VR
agency to which a beneficiary's ticket is assigned for providing
services to the beneficiary under the Ticket to Work program if certain
conditions are met. As required by section 101(e)(2)(B) of Public Law
No. 106-170, we have added a complete description of the format and the
wording of the ticket to this section.
Section 411.125 states the following requirements, among others,
for eligibility to receive a ticket: a title II beneficiary must be age
18 to 64, and a title XVI beneficiary must be age 18 to 64 and be
eligible for disability payments under the disability standard for
adults; a beneficiary must be in current pay status for monthly cash
benefits based on disability under title II of the Act or monthly
Federal cash benefits based on disability or blindness under title XVI
of the Act; and a beneficiary's case must either (1) have a permanent
impairment or a nonpermanent impairment (i.e. an impairment for which
medical improvement is possible but cannot be predicted), or (2) have
an impairment that is expected to improve and have undergone at least
one continuing disability review (CDR).
In developing requirements for ticket eligibility under these
regulations, we considered, but decided not to extend eligibility for a
ticket to three additional groups of individuals.
The first group consists of beneficiaries who have impairments that
are expected to improve and for whom we have not yet conducted at least
one continuing disability review. Because these beneficiaries have
conditions that are expected to medically improve in a relatively short
period of time, they could be expected to return to work without the
need for services under the Ticket to Work program. Continuing
disability reviews for this category of beneficiaries are scheduled for
6-18 months after the initial disability determination. Under these
rules, if we determine in the first continuing disability review that
the beneficiary remains disabled, we would then issue a ticket,
provided that the beneficiary met the other ticket eligibility
criteria. This approach would ensure that beneficiaries whose
conditions do not improve as anticipated have the opportunity to
benefit from services under the Ticket to Work program within a
relatively short period of time after the initial determination.
The second group consists of individuals who have not attained age
18. Beneficiaries in this group generally are in school, still pursuing
completion of their formal elementary and secondary education. For this
group, participation in an employment plan under the Ticket to Work
program could interfere with their pursuit of an education, completion
of which many believe should be the primary focus and goal for school-
age youth.
The third group consists of those who received title XVI payments
prior to attaining age 18 (i.e. under the disability standard for
children) and have since attained age 18, but for whom we have not yet
conducted a redetermination of their eligibility under the disability
standard for adults. Because ongoing eligibility has not yet been
determined for these beneficiaries, we believe that it is premature to
issue a ticket to them immediately. Under the final rules, if we
establish in the redetermination that a beneficiary in this group is
eligible for disability payments under the disability standard for
adults, we would then issue a ticket, provided that the beneficiary met
the other ticket eligibility criteria.
We plan to review periodically our policy regarding ticket
eligibility, including whether it would be prudent to extend
eligibility to the groups discussed above. In addition, we are
interested in exploring various approaches to assist youth under age 18
to transition to independence, further education, and careers in the
workforce. Therefore, we are publishing a Notice elsewhere in today's
Federal Register in which we are seeking suggestions from the public to
assist us in designing for beneficiaries in the second and third groups
an approach that could complement the Ticket to Work program.
In response to public comments, in these final rules we have added
Sec. 411.125(c) to explicitly state that individuals whose entitlement
to title II benefits based on disability is reinstated under section
223(i) of the Act, or whose eligibility for title XVI benefits based on
disability or blindness is reinstated under section 1631(p) of the Act,
will be eligible to receive another ticket in the first month he or she
is entitled to reinstated benefits, as long as the beneficiary meets
certain other requirements for eligibility for a ticket. Sections
223(i) and 1631(p) of the Act were added by section 112 of Public Law
106-170.
Section 411.130 explains that SSA will distribute tickets in
graduated phases.
Section 411.135 explains that participation in the Ticket to Work
program is voluntary. This section explains that if beneficiaries want
to participate in the program, they may take their tickets to any
entity serving under the program.
Section 411.140 explains that a beneficiary may assign his or her
ticket to any EN or State VR agency that is willing to provide
services, and that the
[[Page 67374]]
beneficiary may discuss his or her rehabilitation and employment plans
with as many entities as he or she wishes. This section explains that
the beneficiary can obtain a list of the approved ENs in his or her
area. This section also explains certain requirements that must be met
in order for a beneficiary to assign a ticket. Section 411.140 provides
that an individual will be eligible to assign a ticket to an EN or
State VR agency only during a month in which the individual meets the
requirements of Sec. 411.125(a)(1) and (a)(2). In general, this means
the individual must be age 18-64 and must be either a title II
disability beneficiary in current pay status who is not receiving
benefit payments under 20 CFR 404.316(c), 404.337(c), 404.352(d) or
404.1597a, or a title XVI disability beneficiary whose Federal SSI cash
benefits are not suspended and who is not receiving disability or
blindness benefit payments under 20 CFR 416.996 or 416.1338.
Section 411.140 also provides that beneficiaries and ENs must agree
to and sign an individual work plan (IWP) (or, in the case of a State
VR agency, an individualized plan for employment (IPE)) before a ticket
can be assigned. In response to public comments, in these final rules
we are revising Sec. 411.140(a) to indicate that individuals may assign
their ticket to a State VR agency if they are eligible to receive VR
services according to 34 CFR 361.42. We are making a similar change to
Sec. 411.150 regarding reassignment of a ticket to a State VR agency.
Also in response to comments, we are revising Secs. 411.140 and 411.150
to indicate that a representative of the State VR agency must agree to
and sign the IPE. We also have modified Secs. 411.140 and 411.150 of
the final rules to provide that in order for a ticket to be assigned or
reassigned to a State VR agency, the beneficiary and a representative
of the State VR agency must agree to and sign both an IPE and a form
that provides the information described in Sec. 411.385(a)(1), (2) and
(3) of these final regulations.
We are also making changes to Sec. 411.140(d) and (e) and
Sec. 411.150(b) and (c) in these final rules to clarify that a copy of
the signed IWP developed by the beneficiary and the EN, or the
completed and signed form required for assignment or reassignment of a
ticket to a State VR agency under Sec. 411.385(a) and (b), must be
submitted to and received by the PM in order for a ticket to be
assigned or reassigned to the EN or State VR agency. If the IWP or
required form has been submitted to and received by the PM, and if the
other requirements for assignment or reassignment of a ticket are met,
we will consider the ticket assigned or reassigned to the EN or State
VR agency, effective as of the first day on which such other
requirements are satisfied.
Section 411.145 describes the conditions under which a beneficiary
may take a ticket back after it has been assigned to an EN or State VR
agency. It also describes other conditions under which a ticket that is
assigned can be taken out of assignment. In response to public
comments, we are revising Sec. 411.145(b) to state that a State VR
agency may ask the PM to take a ticket out of assignment if the State
VR agency stops providing services because the individual has been
determined to be ineligible for VR services under 34 CFR 361.42, and to
provide a cross-reference to the reassignment rules in Sec. 411.150.
Section 411.150 explains the beneficiary's right to reassign a
ticket, if the beneficiary chooses. In response to public comments, we
have revised Sec. 411.150(b) to state that the beneficiary and a
representative of the State VR agency must agree to and sign an
Individualized Plan for Employment if the beneficiary wishes to
reassign his or her ticket to a State VR agency. Also, as discussed
above, we have modified this provision in the final rules to provide
that in order for a ticket to be reassigned to a State VR agency, the
beneficiary and a representative of the State VR agency must agree to
and sign both an IPE and a form that provides the information described
in Sec. 411.385(a)(1), (2) and (3). We also are modifying
Sec. 411.150(b) to clarify that one of the conditions for reassigning a
ticket is that the ticket must be unassigned. We explain that if the
ticket currently is assigned to an EN or State VR agency, the
beneficiary must first tell the PM in writing that he or she wants to
take the ticket out of assignment as provided under Sec. 411.145. In
addition, as written, proposed Sec. 411.150(b)(2) potentially could
have prevented certain individuals who were working with ENs or State
VR agencies from reassigning their ticket, thus unnecessarily limiting
their ability to take full advantage of the provisions of the Ticket to
Work program.
Accordingly, we have modified the requirements in Sec. 411.150(b)
to provide exceptions to the general rule that in order to reassign a
ticket, an individual must be age 18-64 and either a title II
disability beneficiary in current pay status or a title XVI disability
beneficiary whose Federal SSI cash benefits are not suspended. Final
Sec. 411.150(b)(3) provides that an individual does not have to satisfy
these requirements if the individual and a representative of the new EN
sign an IWP, or if the individual and a representative of the State VR
agency sign both an IPE and the required form, within certain time
periods. The time periods begin from the effective date on which the
ticket was no longer assigned to the previous EN or State VR agency.
The applicable time period depends on whether the individual's ticket
is or is not in use under the rules in Sec. 411.170 et seq. For an
individual whose ticket is not in use, the specified time period is 30
days from the effective date the ticket no longer was assigned to the
previous EN or State VR agency. For an individual whose ticket is in
use, the specified time period is the three-month period that begins
with the first month the ticket no longer was assigned to the previous
EN or State VR agency. This three-month period is the extension period
described in Sec. 411.220.
The requirements that an individual be age 18-64 and be either a
title II disability beneficiary in current pay status or a title XVI
disability beneficiary whose Federal SSI cash benefits are not
suspended are two of the basic requirements specified in
Sec. 411.125(a)(1) and (2) which an individual must meet in order to be
eligible to receive a ticket under that section. In these final rules,
an individual must meet these same requirements in order to be eligible
to reassign a ticket under Sec. 411.150, unless one of the conditions
specified in Sec. 411.150(b)(3) is met.
In addition, final Sec. 411.150(a) provides that an individual will
not be eligible to reassign a ticket if he or she is receiving title II
disability benefits under 20 CFR 404.316(c), 404.337(c), 404.352(d) or
404.1597a, or is receiving title XVI disability or blindness benefit
payments under 20 CFR 416.996 or 416.1338. This rule was reflected in
proposed Sec. 411.150(b)(2). We are retaining this rule in final
Sec. 411.150(a). This rule applies regardless of whether one of the
conditions specified in Sec. 411.150(b)(3) is met.
Other changes which we are making in final Sec. 411.150(b) and (c)
are explained above in our discussion of the revisions to Sec. 411.140.
Because of these changes, proposed Sec. 411.150(d) is deleted in these
final rules.
Section 411.155 explains when a beneficiary's ticket terminates and
eligibility for participation in the Ticket to Work program ends. Once
a ticket terminates, a beneficiary may not assign or reassign it to an
EN or State VR agency. Under these regulations, a ticket will terminate
when: (1) entitlement to Social Security disability benefits ends for
reasons other than the individual's
[[Page 67375]]
work activity or earnings, or when eligibility for SSI benefits based
on disability or blindness terminates for reasons other than the
individual's work activity or earnings, whichever is later; (2) a
Social Security disabled widow(er) beneficiary attains age 65; or (3) a
disabled or blind SSI beneficiary reaches age 65 and may qualify for
SSI benefits based on age.
In order to provide clarity regarding all of the circumstances
under which a ticket will terminate and an individual's eligibility for
participation in the Ticket to Work program ends, we also are expanding
Sec. 411.155 to add a description of the events that terminate the
ticket after the beneficiary's entitlement to title II benefits based
on disability or eligibility for title XVI benefits based on disability
or blindness terminated because of work or earnings. After such
termination of entitlement or eligibility (and, in the case of a
concurrent title II/title XVI disability beneficiary, the termination
of entitlement/eligibility under the other program), a ticket will
terminate in any of the following months: (1) the month we make a final
determination or decision that an individual is not entitled to have
title II benefits based on disability reinstated under section 223(i)
of the Act or not eligible to have title XVI benefits based on
disability or blindness reinstated under section 1631(p) of the Act;
(2) the month in which we make a final determination or decision that
an individual is not entitled to title II benefits based on disability
or eligible for title XVI benefits based on disability or blindness
based on the filing of an application for benefits; (3) the month in
which a beneficiary reaches retirement age (as defined in section
216(l) of the Act); (4) the month in which the beneficiary dies; (5)
the month in which a beneficiary becomes entitled to a title II benefit
that is not based on disability or eligible for a title XVI benefit
that is not based on disability or blindness; and (6) the month in
which the beneficiary again becomes entitled to title II benefits based
on disability, or eligible for title XVI benefits based on disability
or blindness, based on filing a new application.
In addition, consistent with the modification to Sec. 411.125, we
are modifying Sec. 411.155 to indicate that when a beneficiary is
eligible to receive another ticket as a result of benefit reinstatement
under section 223(i) or 1631(p) of the Act, the ticket that the
beneficiary received in connection with the previous period of
entitlement or eligibility will terminate in the month the beneficiary
is eligible for the new ticket.
We have deleted reference to payment of 60 outcome payments to an
EN that was described in proposed Sec. 411.155(d), since this event
properly refers to the period of using a ticket (see Sec. 411.171(d)
and (e)).
Subpart C--Suspension of Continuing Disability Reviews for
Beneficiaries Who Are Using a Ticket
Under section 221(i) of the Act and under the authority granted by
sections 1631 and 1633 of the Act, we conduct periodic reviews to
ensure that beneficiaries continue to meet the definition of disability
under sections 223(d) and 1614(a) of the Act. These reviews are called
continuing disability reviews (CDRs). Public Law 106-170 amends the Act
to add section 1148(i), which states that SSA may not initiate a CDR
during any period in which a beneficiary is using a ticket. The statute
states:
``During any period for which an individual is using, as defined by
the Commissioner, a ticket to work and self-sufficiency issued under
this section, the Commissioner (and any applicable State agency) may
not initiate a continuing disability review or other review under
section 221 of whether the individual is or is not under a disability
or a review under title XVI similar to any such review under section
221.''
The definition of using a ticket is to be determined by the
Commissioner of Social Security. Subpart C outlines our definition of
using a ticket.
In developing our definition of using a ticket, we considered two
key factors. First, the intent of the Ticket to Work program is to
allow beneficiaries with disabilities to seek the services they need to
work and to reduce or eliminate dependence on Social Security
disability and SSI benefits. However, anecdotal evidence suggests that
some beneficiaries are afraid that working, or even receiving
vocational rehabilitation services, may increase the likelihood that
their benefits will be terminated by a CDR. Therefore, using a ticket
should be defined in a way that minimizes this employment disincentive
for beneficiaries participating in the Ticket to Work program. In order
to maintain the integrity of the disability programs, it is also
important that beneficiaries who have medically improved and who no
longer meet the definition of disability under sections 223(d) and
1614(a)(3) of the Act do not continue to receive disability benefits
for an undue length of time.
Our definition seeks to balance these concerns by ensuring that
CDRs are suspended only during the period in which beneficiaries are
making timely progress toward reducing or eliminating dependence on
Social Security disability or SSI benefits, while at the same time
recognizing that progress toward that goal may not always be rapid or
continuous.
Under our definition of using a ticket, a beneficiary will be
considered to be using a ticket during the period in which he or she
was making progress toward the goal of reducing or eliminating
dependence on disability benefits within reasonable time frames. Under
this approach, beneficiaries will be allowed a limited period to
prepare for work. At the end of this period, they will need to show
that they were progressing toward self-sufficiency by demonstrating
increasing levels of employment.
An important advantage of this definition of using a ticket is that
it increases employment incentives by ``rewarding'' beneficiaries who
work and progress toward self-sufficiency with continued suspension of
CDRs. However, requiring beneficiaries to demonstrate increasing levels
of employment within a defined time frame results in a fairly complex
regulation. The complexity arises from our attempt to balance the
concerns discussed above and, to the extent possible, to accommodate
the diverse employment needs of a wide range of beneficiaries. While
some level of complexity is unavoidable, we have attempted wherever
possible to simplify the regulation and to make it straightforward to
implement.
Based on the comments that we received regarding the complexity and
difficulty of this subpart, we are revising and reorganizing the
content to increase clarity wherever possible.
Sections 411.160 and 411.165 introduce this subpart. In response to
a comment on proposed Sec. 411.160 noting a confusion in the use of the
term ``continuing disability review'' for both medical and work
reviews, we are clarifying the language in paragraph (b) to reference
our rules on when we may conduct a CDR to determine whether an
individual remains eligible for disability-based benefits. In response
to recommendations that we clarify proposed Sec. 411.165 to explain
when the period of using a ticket begins and ends, we are expanding
Sec. 411.165 to include cross-references to Secs. 411.170 and 411.171.
We are adding Sec. 411.166 in response to comments on our proposed
rules regarding the use of new terms. This
[[Page 67376]]
section provides a glossary of the following terms: ``active
participation in your employment plan,'' ``extension period,''
``inactive status,'' ``initial 24-month period,'' ``progress review,''
``timely progress guidelines,'' ``12-month progress review period,''
and ``using a ticket.''
In our proposed rules, we used the terms ``work review'' or ``work
review period'' when referring to the requirements for making timely
progress toward self-supporting employment. In response to comments
that these terms caused confusion with existing terms used to describe
``work CDR,'' we are now referring to ``progress review'' or ``progress
review period,'' which are included in the glossary of terms in
Sec. 411.166.
Sections 411.170 and 411.171 describe when the period of using a
ticket begins and ends. The period of using a ticket begins when the
ticket is first assigned to an EN or State VR agency. The primary
purpose of the suspension of CDRs is to ensure that Ticket to Work
program participants are not inhibited in their attempts to work or
pursue an employment plan by the fear that such activities will
increase the likelihood that their benefits will be terminated in a
medical review. Prior to the assignment of the ticket, a beneficiary is
not participating in these activities under the Ticket to Work program.
We are revising Sec. 411.171 to clarify that the period of using a
ticket ends with the earliest of the following (1) the occurrence of
one of the events listed in Sec. 411.155, which describes the events
that will result in termination of the ticket; (2) when the beneficiary
is determined to be no longer making timely progress toward self-
supporting employment according to our guidelines (see Secs. 411.180
through 411.200); (3) when the extension period expires if the
beneficiary has not reassigned the ticket within the period; or (4)
when we have made 60 outcome payments to an EN, including a State VR
agency functioning as an EN, under subpart H. In instances where the
beneficiary assigned a ticket to a State VR agency which selected the
cost reimbursement payment system, the period of using a ticket also
will end with the 60th month for which an outcome payment would have
been made had the State VR agency chosen to function as an EN with
respect to the beneficiary.
Section 411.175 describes our rules when a beneficiary assigns a
ticket after a CDR has begun. A beneficiary may assign the ticket and
receive services under the Ticket to Work program. We will, however,
complete the CDR.
Sections 411.180, 411.185, 411.190 and 411.191 describe our
guidelines for timely progress toward self-supporting employment.
After assigning a ticket, beneficiaries will be allowed up to two
years to prepare for employment. This two-year period is referred to in
the final rules as the initial 24-month period. After two years, we
will consider that beneficiaries are continuing to use a ticket, and
are therefore eligible to receive the protection in Section 1148(i) of
the Act regarding non-initiation of CDRs, if they work at progressively
higher levels of employment. Such a progression would allow
beneficiaries time to improve their employment capacities.
We are reordering certain paragraphs in Sec. 411.180 to provide a
more appropriate placement for the definitions of terms we use to
describe the guidelines we use to determine if an individual is making
timely progress toward self-supporting employment. We are also
clarifying that, for purposes of counting the 24 months comprising the
initial 24-month period, we will not count any month in which the
ticket is not assigned or not in use.
Under our timely progress guidelines, in the 24-month progress
review conducted by the PM, beneficiaries must demonstrate that their
employment plan has a goal of at least three months of work, as defined
in Sec. 411.185, by the time of the first 12-month progress review. The
PM also must find that beneficiaries can reasonably be expected to
reach this goal. In response to public comments, we are revising
Sec. 411.180(c)(1) to allow beneficiaries to use months worked during
the initial 24-month period to meet these requirements of the 24-month
progress review, as long as the work was at the level applicable to the
work requirements for the first 12-month progress review period under
Sec. 411.185. In the third year of participation in the Ticket to Work
program (referred to in the final rules as the first 12-month progress
review period), beneficiaries would be required to work at least three
months at a specified level. In response to public comment, we are
revising Sec. 411.180(c)(2) to allow beneficiaries to use months worked
during the initial 24-month period to meet this requirement as well, as
long as the work was at the required level as described in
Sec. 411.185. We are revising Sec. 411.185(a)(1), (b)(1) and (c)(1) to
reference the rules in Sec. 411.180(c)(1) and (c)(2) on when months of
work performed during the initial 24-month period may be used to meet
certain requirements of the 24-month progress review and the work
requirements of the first 12-month progress review period.
In the fourth year of participation in the program, beneficiaries
will be required to work at least six months at the SGA level. In the
fifth and succeeding years, in order to be considered to be using a
ticket, they will be required to work at least six months in each year
and have earnings in each such month that are sufficient to eliminate
the payment of Social Security disability benefits and Federal SSI
benefits.
In developing these guidelines, we recognized that progress toward
self-sufficiency is not always continuous, and some beneficiaries may
not attain full self-sufficiency. Many beneficiaries have disabilities
with cycles of relapse and remission. In addition, some beneficiaries
may need to try more than one job before finding a situation that suits
their abilities and needs. The requirement that beneficiaries need only
work three months out of 12 in the third year and six months out of 12
in succeeding years recognizes that some beneficiaries may not be able
to work on a continuous basis.
Section 411.185 provides levels of earnings that an individual must
have in order to be considered to be using a ticket. It defines when an
individual will be considered to be working for purposes of meeting the
timely progress guidelines. Under this definition, the required
earnings level will increase over time. In the third and fourth years
of participation in the Ticket to Work program (i.e. the first and
second 12-month progress review periods), both Social Security
disability beneficiaries and concurrent Social Security and SSI
beneficiaries will be required to work at the SGA level applicable to
non-blind beneficiaries for the specified number of months. This means
that the beneficiary must have monthly earnings from employment or
self-employment, after any applicable deductions under 20 CFR 404.1572
through 404.1576, that are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-
blind beneficiaries.
The SGA threshold amount is set by regulation under 20 CFR
404.1574(b)(2), and is currently $740 a month for non-blind
beneficiaries. Social Security disability beneficiaries, including
concurrent Social Security and SSI beneficiaries, who are in a trial
work period or who are statutorily blind will be deemed to have met the
requirement to work at the SGA level applicable to non-blind
beneficiaries if their gross earnings from employment, before any
exclusions, are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind
[[Page 67377]]
beneficiaries, or if their net earnings from self-employment, before
any exclusions, are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind
beneficiaries.
Under the definition of work for purposes of the first and second
12-month progress review periods, SSI disability and blindness
beneficiaries will be considered to be working in a month in which the
beneficiary has gross earnings from employment, before any exclusions,
that are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind
beneficiaries, or has net earnings from self-employment, before any
exclusions, that are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind
beneficiaries.
Earnings at the levels established in Sec. 411.185 for the third
and fourth years of participation in the program may not be sufficient
to eliminate the payment of all disability benefits. The amount of
earnings needed to eliminate the payment of disability benefits depends
on a variety of factors, including whether the beneficiary receives
Social Security or SSI benefits, or both, whether the beneficiary is
blind, and whether the beneficiary has impairment-related work expenses
or is eligible for other income exclusions. The earnings requirement
for the third and fourth years are set at levels that allow
beneficiaries time to work toward the higher levels of earnings that
may be required to eliminate the payment of disability benefits for the
required months in subsequent years of program participation.
In the fifth and subsequent years of participation in the program,
both Social Security and SSI beneficiaries will be required to work for
at least six months with earnings in each such month that are
sufficient to eliminate payment of Social Security disability and
Federal SSI cash benefits in a month. The requirement that individuals
using a ticket eventually attain this level of earnings is consistent
with the payment structure of the Ticket to Work program, in which ENs
receive outcome payments only when Federal disability benefit payments
are eliminated. It also reflects that one of the purposes of the Ticket
to Work program is to produce savings in benefit payments. Since the
suspension of CDRs for individuals using a ticket means that it is
possible that some beneficiaries who no longer meet the definition of
disability will continue to be eligible for benefits, it is important
that the suspension of CDRs not continue for an undue length of time
without a significant reduction in benefit payments due to earnings.
In Sec. 411.190, we discuss how it will be determined if a
beneficiary is meeting the timely progress guidelines. To place the
rules in a more logical order according to the sequence of events and
actions they discuss, we are expanding Sec. 411.190 to incorporate the
rules for placing a ticket in inactive status, as well as other rules
relating to the initial 24-month period, that were previously set out
in proposed Secs. 411.192 and 411.220. (In the final rules,
Sec. 411.192 has been deleted, and proposed Sec. 411.225 has been
redesignated Sec. 411.220.) During the initial 24-month period
following assignment of a ticket, the PM will give beneficiaries the
option of placing the ticket in inactive status if they are unable to
participate in their employment plan for a significant period of time
for any reason. Beneficiaries may decide to exercise this option
because any months during which the ticket is in inactive status will
not count toward the time limitations (i.e. the initial 24-month
period) under the timely progress guidelines. The PM will explain,
however, that since the ticket will not be in use during the period in
which it is in inactive status, the beneficiary will be subject to a
CDR, should one become due.
A beneficiary will be subject to initiation of a CDR during any
period for which the beneficiary's ticket is considered to be not in
use. A ticket is considered to be not in use during any month during
which the ticket is in inactive status as described in Sec. 411.190 or
during which the ticket is unassigned following the close of the three-
month extension period described in Sec. 411.220. A ticket also is
considered to be not in use after the period of using a ticket ends as
described in Sec. 411.171.
We are modifying the summary table in Sec. 411.191 to reflect the
rule we are adding to Sec. 411.180(c)(2) which will allow beneficiaries
to use months worked during the initial 24-month period to meet the
work requirements of the first 12-month progress review if the work was
at the requisite level. We also are making changes to the table in
these final rules to clarify certain entries in the table, to reflect
changes we are making to other sections of the final rules in subpart
C, and to provide a more accurate description of the level of earnings
required for SSI-only beneficiaries during the first and second 12-
month progress review periods.
In Secs. 411.195, 411.200 and 411.205, we discuss how the PM will
conduct periodic progress reviews to ensure that beneficiaries are
meeting the timely progress guidelines. The first review will be a 24-
month progress review occurring at the end of the initial 24-month
period. This will be followed by 12-month progress reviews. After
successfully completing a progress review, the beneficiary will be
considered to be meeting the timely progress guidelines until the next
review is completed. If a beneficiary disagrees with the PM's decision
in any review, the beneficiary will have the right to ask SSA to review
the PM's decision. The Commissioner or the Commissioner's designee will
review the decision. The criteria for the 24-month progress review and
the 12-month progress reviews are designed to be as clear-cut as
possible. This feature, combined with the PM's responsibility for
conducting the reviews should allow for rapid processing of reviews and
decrease the administrative burden on both the beneficiary and SSA.
In response to public comments, we are adding a sentence to
Sec. 411.195(a)(1) to indicate that the activities outlined in the
employment plan during the initial 24-month period may include
employment.
In Sec. 411.210, we explain that a determination that a beneficiary
is not making timely progress toward self-supporting employment will
result in our finding that the beneficiary no longer is using a ticket.
The beneficiary would be allowed to continue in the Ticket to Work
program, and the beneficiary's EN or State VR agency would be eligible
for any payments that became due. In response to public comments, we
are modifying Sec. 411.210(a) to indicate that these payments would
include not just outcome payments, but also milestone payments (or, for
a State VR agency electing payment under the cost reimbursement payment
system, payments under the cost reimbursement payment system) for which
the ENs or State VR agencies are eligible. These beneficiaries,
however, would once again be subject to CDRs.
This section also provides that a beneficiary who fails to meet the
timely progress guidelines will have the opportunity to be considered
to be using a ticket later if the beneficiary actively participates in
the employment plan or works for a specified number of months. The
requirements which a beneficiary must meet in order to re-enter in-use
status (including the number of months, type of participation, and
earnings level required) vary depending on how far the beneficiary had
progressed when he or she failed to meet the timely progress
guidelines.
We are providing this method of allowing a beneficiary to be
considered
[[Page 67378]]
again to be using a ticket because, as previously stated, we recognize
that due to the nature of disability, progress toward increased self-
sufficiency is not always direct. Beneficiaries may make unsuccessful
attempts before reaching their employment goals, and these unsuccessful
attempts should not deprive them of the supports that they need to make
renewed efforts.
In response to a public comment, we are adding a new
Sec. 411.210(b)(1) to provide that a beneficiary who fails to meet the
timely progress guidelines during the initial 24-month period may re-
enter in-use status by demonstrating three consecutive months of active
participation in the employment plan. This new provision is more
consistent with the requirements of active participation during this
period under the timely progress guidelines under Sec. 411.190(a). In
new Sec. 411.210(b)(1)(iii) we explain that for a beneficiary who is
reinstated to in-use status after having failed to meet the timely
progress guidelines during the initial 24-month period, the next review
will be the 24-month progress review. We also have added a new
Sec. 411.210(b)(2) to provide a separate provision on re-entering in-
use status for a beneficiary who failed to meet the timely progress
guidelines in the 24-month progress review. In new
Sec. 411.210(b)(2)(i), we explain that, consistent with the proposed
rules, a beneficiary who fails to meet the timely progress guidelines
in the 24-month progress review may re-enter in-use status by
completing three months of work (as defined in Sec. 411.185(a)(1),
(b)(1) or (c)(1)) within a rolling 12-month period. We have modified
this provision (which was formerly a part of proposed
Sec. 411.210(b)(1)) to provide that the beneficiary also must satisfy
the test of Sec. 411.200(a)(2) regarding the anticipated level of the
beneficiary's work during the ensuing 12-month progress review period
that would begin if the beneficiary were reinstated to in-use status.
We also clarify in new Sec. 411.210(b)(2)(i) and (iii) that the work
requirements for this 12-month progress review period will be the work
requirements that are applicable during the second 12-month progress
review period.
To accommodate new Sec. 411.210(b)(1) and (b)(2), we have
renumbered the remaining numbered paragraphs that were included under
proposed Sec. 411.210(b). In Sec. 411.210(b)(3), (b)(4) and (b)(5) of
the final rules, we have added provisions to the rules on re-entering
in-use status to provide that, in addition to completing the work
requirements, the beneficiary also must satisfy the test of
Sec. 411.200(a)(2) regarding the anticipated level of the beneficiary's
work during the ensuing 12-month progress review period that would
begin if the beneficiary were reinstated to in-use status. This change
is consistent with the two-step process for the 12-month progress
reviews under Sec. 411.200(a).
For further clarification of the process of re-entering in-use
status, we are adding Sec. 411.210(c), and revising Sec. 411.210(b), to
describe the process for requesting reinstatement to in-use status, to
explain that the PM will decide whether the beneficiary has satisfied
the requirements for re-entering in-use status, and to provide that a
beneficiary may ask us to review the PM's decision that the beneficiary
has not satisfied the requirements for re-entering in-use status. These
sections explain that a beneficiary must submit a written request to
the PM asking that he or she be reinstated to in-use status. If the PM
decides that the beneficiary has not satisfied the requirements for re-
entering in-use status, the beneficiary may request that we review the
decision.
Final Sec. 411.220 was Sec. 411.225 in the proposed rules. Final
Sec. 411.220 explains that beneficiaries who are using a ticket are
eligible for an extension period of up to three months to reassign a
ticket that previously was assigned to an EN or State VR agency and no
longer is assigned. We have revised this section to indicate that the
ticket must be in use for the beneficiary to be eligible for the
extension period. During this period, we will consider that the ticket
still is in use, and the beneficiary will not be subject to CDRs. In
response to public comments, we are modifying this section to show the
beneficiary's moving to an area not served by the previous EN or State
VR agency as a reason the ticket may no longer be assigned. We also
have explained in Sec. 411.220(e) of the final rules that a beneficiary
whose extension period began during the initial 24-month period will
have a new initial 24-month period when the beneficiary reassigns a
ticket during the extension period to an EN or State VR agency, other
than the one to which the ticket previously was assigned.
We are adding a new Sec. 411.225 to describe the circumstance of a
beneficiary reassigning a ticket after the end of the extension period.
This section concerns a situation that was not discussed in the
proposed rules. This section explains that a beneficiary may reassign a
ticket after the end of the extension period under the conditions
described in Sec. 411.150. Section 411.225(c) explains that if the
extension period began during the initial 24-month period, a
beneficiary will have a new initial 24-month period when the
beneficiary reassigns a ticket to an EN or State VR agency, other than
the one to which the ticket previously was assigned. The reason for
providing a new initial 24-month period at this time is because the
beneficiary may have to reassign his or her ticket due to no fault of
his or her own. For example, the EN may have gone out of business or be
no longer approved to participate in the Ticket to Work program, or the
beneficiary may have to relocate or may have a relapse in his or her
medical condition. Section 411.225(d) explains that if the extension
period began during any 12-month progress review period, the period
comprising the remaining months in that review period will begin with
the first month beginning after the day on which reassignment of the
ticket is effective.
Subpart D--Use of One or More Program Managers To Assist in
Administration of the Ticket To Work Program
Section 1148(d)(1) of the Act requires the Commissioner to enter
into an agreement with one or more organizations to serve as a PM to
assist the Commissioner in administering the Ticket to Work program.
Section 101(e)(2)(E) of Public Law 106-170 identified specific
regulations that SSA must promulgate regarding the terms of the
agreements to be entered into with a PM. Three items are specifically
required:
(1) the terms by which a PM would be precluded from direct
participation in the delivery of services;
(2) standards which must be met by quality assurance measures and
methods of recruitment of ENs; and
(3) the format under which dispute resolution will operate under
section 1148(d)(7) of the Act.
Among other things, section 1148(d)(7) requires the Commissioner to
provide a mechanism for resolving disputes between PMs and ENs, and
between PMs and providers of services.
Subpart D of these regulations explains that SSA will contract with
one or more organizations to serve as a PM and assist SSA in
administering the Ticket to Work program.
Section 411.230 explains that SSA will conduct a competitive
bidding process to select one or more private organizations to perform
the PM's functions.
Section 411.235 describes the minimum qualifications required of a
PM.
[[Page 67379]]
Section 411.240 describes certain limitations that are placed on a
PM regarding the direct provision of services under the Ticket to Work
program.
Section 411.245 identifies key responsibilities that a PM must
assume to assist SSA in administering the program, including ensuring
that information provided to beneficiaries is in alternate formats,
meaning media appropriate to beneficiaries' impairments. We are
revising paragraph (b)(2) of Sec. 411.245 to remove the word
``medical'' from the term ``medical impairment'' used in defining
``accessible format,'' as recommended by one commenter, because not all
impairments are medical. We are also revising paragraph (c)(2) of
Sec. 411.245, as recommended by a number of commenters, to make it
clear that the PM will be responsible for making determinations
regarding the allocation of outcome or milestone payments when the
beneficiary has been served by more than one EN.
Section 411.250 explains how SSA will evaluate a PM.
Subpart E--Employment Networks
Section 1148(d)(4)(A) of the Act requires the Commissioner to
select and enter into agreements with ENs to provide services under the
Ticket to Work program. Section 1148(f)(1)(A) states that each EN
serving under the Ticket to Work program shall consist of an agency or
instrumentality of a State (or a political subdivision thereof) or a
private entity that assumes responsibility for the coordination and
delivery of services under the program to beneficiaries assigning
tickets to it.
These ENs are in addition to State agencies administering or
supervising the administration of the State plan approved under title I
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.),
known as State VR agencies, that will also be serving beneficiaries
with disabilities under the Ticket to Work program. State VR agencies
will have the option of serving beneficiaries with tickets either as an
EN (that is, to be paid under one of the EN payment systems described
in subpart H of these regulations) or under the existing cost
reimbursement payment system authorized in sections 222(d) and 1615(d)
of the Act. The Commissioner is also directed to enter into an
agreement with any alternate participant operating under the authority
of section 222(d)(2) of the Act in any State where the Ticket to Work
program is being implemented if the alternate participant chooses to
serve as an EN. An EN may consist of a one-stop delivery system
established under subtitle B of title I of the Workforce Investment Act
of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2811 et seq.).
Section 1148(f) of the Act requires that entities seeking to
participate in the Ticket to Work program as ENs meet certain
qualifications. The Commissioner has discretion in determining the
qualifications that an entity must meet to be approved to serve as an
EN. We are providing requirements for ENs that are not unduly
burdensome and that are intended to permit both traditional as well as
other types of entities to qualify. The Commissioner's intent is to
ensure that non-traditional service providers are not prohibited from
being approved as ENs, while still requiring evidence that all ENs meet
certain minimum qualifications such as licensure, accreditation,
academic qualifications, or experience. This inclusive approach is
critically important to ensure that beneficiaries with disabilities
have a real choice in services necessary to obtain, regain and maintain
employment.
Section 1148(f) of the Act also addresses requirements for ENs
under the Ticket to Work program. It requires each EN to serve a
prescribed service area and ensure that employment services, VR
services, and other support services are provided under appropriate
IWPs.
Sections 411.300 and 411.305 of these regulations explain what an
EN is and what entities are eligible to apply to serve as ENs.
Section 411.310 explains how public or private entities will apply
to us to be approved as ENs and how we will determine whether an entity
qualifies to be an EN. We are changing the heading of Sec. 411.310 to
make it clear that this section is not applicable to State VR agencies
and that State VR agencies do not apply to be ENs.
We are revising the first sentence of Sec. 411.310(a) to make it
clear that a State VR agency does not have to respond to our request
for proposals (RFP) to function as an EN.
We are adding paragraph (c) to this section to Sec. 411.310 to
provide a cross-reference to Sec. 411.360 on how a State VR agency
begins to participate as an EN in the Ticket to Work program.
Section 411.315 describes the minimum qualifications for an EN
under the Ticket to Work program. In response to public comments, we
are adding language to paragraph (a)(2) of Sec. 411.315 to provide
examples of what we mean by programmatically accessible.
We are revising section 411.315(b)(2) to make it clear that ENs are
not required to provide medical or related health services or be
licensed to provide such services, but that the EN should take
reasonable steps to assure that if any medical and related health
services are provided, such medical and health related services are
provided under the formal supervision of persons licensed to prescribe
or supervise the provision of these services.
Section 411.315 provides that an EN must have applicable
certificates, licenses, or other credentials if State law in the
entity's State requires such documentation to provide VR services,
employment services or other support services in the State.
Section 411.320 describes the major responsibilities of an entity
serving as an EN.
Section 411.321 explains the conditions under which we will
terminate an agreement with an EN for inadequate performance. We have
clarified that we will terminate an agreement with an EN for non-
compliance in any of the three areas cited in this section.
Section 411.325 lists the reporting requirements placed on an
entity serving as an EN. We are adding a new paragraph (e) to require
that ENs submit information to assist the PM conducting the reviews
necessary to determine whether a beneficiary is making timely progress
towards self-supporting employment. This requirement is necessary to
obtain information for determining whether a beneficiary will continue
to receive CDR protection. It will make the EN reporting requirement
consistent with the reporting requirement of State VR agencies
regarding timely progress reviews. As a result of adding a new
paragraph (e), we are redesignating the proposed paragraphs (e) through
(i) as paragraphs (f) through (j) in the final rules. We are deleting
the requirement from paragraph (g) in the proposed rules (redesignated
as paragraph (h) in the final rules) to submit a financial report that
shows the percentage of the EN's budget that was spent on serving
beneficiaries with tickets, including the amount spent on beneficiaries
who return to work and those who do not return to work. We are making
this change because of many public comments indicating that this would
be a burdensome reporting requirement.
Section 411.330 explains how we will evaluate an EN's performance.
[[Page 67380]]
Subpart F--State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies' Participation
Section 1148(c) of the Act addresses participation by State VR
agencies in the Ticket to Work program. In general, this section gives
each State VR agency the opportunity to determine, on a case-by-case
basis, whether it will participate in the Ticket to Work program as an
EN or under the cost reimbursement payment system authorized under
sections 222(d) and 1615(d) of the Act (see 20 CFR Secs. 404.2101 et
seq. and 416.2201 et seq.). The State VR agency must elect either the
outcome payment system or the outcome-milestone payment system to be
used when it functions as an EN when serving a beneficiary with a
ticket. The Commissioner is directed to provide for periodic
opportunities to exercise this election.
Generally, under the Ticket to Work program, State VR agencies will
continue to operate as they do today. For example, when a State VR
agency functions as an EN, it will provide services in accordance with
the requirements of the State plan approved under title I of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), and a
client will complete an individualized plan for employment with the
State VR agency. If a State VR agency has a dispute over a payment
under the cost reimbursement payment system, the State VR agency will
use the dispute resolution procedures already in place under 20 CFR
404.2127 and 416.2227. The new functions and responsibilities for State
VR agencies under the Ticket to Work program include checking with the
PM if the State VR agency wants to see if a disabled beneficiary who is
seeking services from the State VR agency has a ticket that is
available for assignment or reassignment, submitting information to the
PM required to assign or reassign a beneficiary's ticket to the State
VR agency, routing EN payment dispute questions through the PM,
submitting preliminary and post-employment data to the PM, and
providing reports regarding the outcomes achieved by beneficiaries
assigning tickets to the State VR agency in those cases where the State
VR agency functioned as an EN.
Subpart F of these regulations establishes that the cost
reimbursement payment system is a payment option under the Ticket to
Work program for State VR agencies, subject to certain limitations
described in Sec. 411.585(a) and (b) of subpart H of these final rules.
Section 411.350 explains that a State VR agency must participate in
the Ticket to Work program if it wishes to receive payment from SSA for
serving disabled beneficiaries who are issued a ticket. We have
clarified this section by adding the words ``who are issued a ticket''.
Section 411.355 describes the different payment options available
to the State VR agencies. Section 411.355 explains that, subject to the
limitations in Sec. 411.585 of subpart H, State VR agencies, on a case-
by-case basis, may participate in the Ticket to Work program either as
an EN or under the cost reimbursement payment system. This section also
explains that the State VR agency must use the EN payment system it
elected when serving a beneficiary as an EN. We have modified the
language and structure of this section for added clarity.
Section 411.360 explains what a State VR agency must do to function
as an EN under the Ticket to Work program with respect to a beneficiary
and explains that a State VR agency may choose, on a case-by-case
basis, to seek payment from SSA under the cost reimbursement payment
system or its elected EN payment system. Paragraph (a) of Sec. 411.360
describes the method SSA will use to communicate with State VR agencies
about implementation of the Ticket to Work program in States. Paragraph
(b) includes a reference to the limitations on payment in Sec. 411.585.
We have made these changes to this section to add clarity.
Section 411.365 describes how a State VR agency will select an EN
payment system for use when functioning as an EN. In these final rules,
we are modifying Sec. 411.365 to eliminate the requirement that the
Governor or Governor's designated representative must sign the letter
advising SSA of which EN payment system the State VR agency will use
when it functions as an EN with respect to a beneficiary who has a
ticket. We are revising this section to provide that the director of
the State agency administering or supervising the administration of the
State plan approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), or the director's designee must sign
the letter advising SSA of the State VR agency's election of an EN
payment system. We are making this change to the final rules to respond
to comments that the director or his or her designee is in a better
position to make the payment election decision.
Section 411.370 explains that a State VR agency generally may
choose to be paid under the cost reimbursement payment system when
serving beneficiaries with tickets, subject to the limitation in
Sec. 411.585(b) of subpart H of these final rules.
Section 411.375 explains that State VR agencies must continue to
provide services to beneficiaries with tickets under the requirements
of the State plan approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.).
Section 411.380 describes how a State VR agency can determine if a
disabled beneficiary seeking services has been issued a ticket and, if
so, the status of the ticket. We have made changes to this section in
the final rules to provide a more accurate description of the
information the State VR agency can obtain from the PM regarding a
beneficiary's ticket status.
Section 411.385 explains that once the State VR agency determines
that a beneficiary is eligible for vocational rehabilitation services,
the beneficiary and a representative of the State VR agency must agree
to and sign an IPE. In these final rules, we are revising the
provisions of Sec. 411.385(a) to conform to the changes we are making
to Secs. 411.140 and 411.150 regarding the requirements that must be
met in order for a beneficiary to assign or reassign a ticket. We
explain that the parties must agree to and sign an IPE in order for the
beneficiary to assign or reassign his or her ticket to the State VR
agency. We explain that Secs. 411.140(d) and 411.150(a) and (b)
describe the other requirements which must be met for a ticket to be
assigned or reassigned, respectively. Final Sec. 411.385(a) explains
that in order for a beneficiary's ticket to be assigned or reassigned
to the State VR agency, the State VR agency must submit the information
described in Sec. 411.385(a)(1)-(a)(3) to the PM. This information
includes the method of payment which the State VR agency is selecting
for a particular beneficiary.
We are revising Sec. 411.385(b) to change the designation of the
person in the State VR agency who is required to sign the completed
form which the State VR agency must submit to the PM in order for a
ticket to be assigned or reassigned to the State VR agency. We are
revising this section to permit ``a representative of the State VR
agency'' to sign the form as this provides greater flexibility to the
State VR agency than our proposed requirement that the form be signed
by ``the State VR agency representative working with the beneficiary.''
Section 411.390 describes what a State VR agency should do when a
beneficiary already receiving services under an approved IPE becomes
eligible for a ticket that is available for assignment and decides to
assign the ticket to the State VR agency. We are modifying this section
in the final rules to provide a more accurate description
[[Page 67381]]
of the circumstances in which an individual who is already receiving
services from the State VR agency under an IPE may become eligible for
a ticket. We also are adding a provision to clarify that the State VR
agency must submit the completed and signed form described in
Sec. 411.385(a) and (b) to the PM in order for the beneficiary's ticket
to be assigned to the State VR agency. In addition, we explain that
Sec. 411.140(d) describes the other requirements which must be met in
order for the beneficiary to assign a ticket.
Section 411.395 explains that each State VR agency will be required
to provide periodic reports to the PM on the specific outcomes achieved
with respect to the services provided to beneficiaries under the Ticket
to Work program in cases where the State VR agency functioned as an EN.
Section 1148(c)(3) of the Act requires State VR agencies and ENs to
enter into agreements regarding the conditions under which services
will be provided when an EN that has been assigned the beneficiary's
ticket refers the beneficiary to a State VR agency for services.
Sections 411.400 and 411.405 explain that an EN may refer a
beneficiary that it is serving under the Ticket to Work program to a
State VR agency for services only if such an agreement is in place
prior to the EN making the referral.
Section 411.410 explains that these agreements should be broad-
based and apply to all beneficiaries who may be referred by an EN to a
particular State VR agency. In the final rules, we are modifying
Sec. 411.410 to indicate that the general guideline that the agreements
should be broad-based and apply to all beneficiaries who may be
referred by an EN to a State VR agency is not intended to preclude an
EN and a State VR agency from entering into an individualized agreement
to meet the needs of a single beneficiary if both the EN and State VR
agency wish to do so.
Section 411.415 explains that the PM will verify the establishment
of such agreements based on the EN's submission of a copy of the
agreement to the PM.
Section 411.420 provides guidance and examples of what could be
included in these agreements.
Section 411.425 explains what a State VR agency should do if an EN
attempts to refer a beneficiary being served under the Ticket to Work
program to the State VR agency without having established such an
agreement.
Section 411.430 explains what the PM should do when notified that a
referral has been attempted in the absence of an agreement.
Section 411.435 establishes procedures for resolving disputes
arising under these agreements between ENs and State VR agencies. We
are revising this section by replacing the word ``should'' in
Sec. 411.435(a) and (b) with ``must,'' to establish the regulatory
policy as a requirement to be followed in the dispute resolution
process.
Subpart G--Requirements for Individual Work Plans
Section 1148(g) of the Act requires each EN to ensure that
employment services, vocational rehabilitation services, and other
support services provided under the Ticket to Work program are provided
under IWPs. The minimum requirements for an IWP are spelled out in this
section.
Subpart G of these regulations establishes the requirements for the
IWP that must be developed when an EN and a beneficiary with a ticket
agree to work together under the Ticket to Work program. Beneficiaries
who are clients of the State VR agencies will continue to use the IPE
rather than an IWP.
Section 411.450 explains what an IWP is. In response to comments on
the proposed rule, we are revising this section to spell out
``individual work plan'' for clarity, and to add the words ``(other
than a State VR agency)'' to clarify that IWPs would not be a
requirement for State VR agencies.
Section 411.455 explains the purpose of the IWP and explains that
the EN must develop and implement the plan in a manner that gives the
beneficiary the opportunity to exercise informed choice in selecting an
employment goal.
Section 411.460 explains that the beneficiary and the EN share the
responsibility for determining the content of the IWP.
Section 411.465 describes the specific information that must be
included in each IWP.
Section 411.470 describes when an IWP becomes effective. In the
final rules, we are revising Sec. 411.470 to conform to the changes we
are making to Secs. 411.140 and 411.150 concerning the requirements
which must be met in order for a beneficiary to assign or reassign his
or her ticket. We are also revising Sec. 411.470(b) to make the
effective date of an IWP consistent with the effective date of the
assignment or reassignment of the beneficiary's ticket.
Subpart H--Employment Network Payment Systems
Section 1148(h) of the Act provides that the Ticket to Work program
shall provide for payment authorized by the Commissioner to ENs under
either an outcome payment system or an outcome-milestone payment
system. Each EN must elect which payment system it will use.
The outcome payment system and the outcome-milestone payment system
are defined in Sec. 411.500. This section also defines certain other
terms we use in this subpart relating to the EN payment systems.
The first term we define in Sec. 411.500 is the ``payment
calculation base.'' This term relates to the amount we will pay an EN
(including a State VR agency choosing to be paid as an EN) under either
EN payment system. We will pay an EN for specific milestones or
outcomes that a beneficiary who assigns the ticket to the EN achieves,
not for the costs of specific services that the EN provides. We base
milestone and outcome payments upon the prior calendar year's national
average disability benefit payable under title II or title XVI, not
upon the specific benefit payment payable to a beneficiary with a
ticket. We call the national average benefit payment the payment
calculation base. In Sec. 411.500(a)(1), we define the payment
calculation base applicable in connection with a title II or concurrent
title II/title XVI disability beneficiary. In Sec. 411.500(a)(2), we
define the payment calculation base applicable in connection with a
title XVI disability beneficiary, who is not concurrently a title II
disability beneficiary.
In Sec. 411.500(b), we define the term ``outcome payment period.''
Both EN payment systems provide for a payment to an EN for each month,
during an individual's outcome payment period, for which Social
Security disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits are not
payable to the individual because of the performance of substantial
gainful activity (SGA) or by reason of earnings from work activity.
Each beneficiary who is issued a ticket has one outcome payment period
in connection with that ticket. In Sec. 411.500(b), we explain that an
individual's outcome payment period begins with the first month, ending
after the date on which the ticket was first assigned, for which Social
Security disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits are not
payable to the individual due to SGA or earnings. We also explain that
the outcome payment period ends with the 60th month, consecutive or
otherwise, ending after such date, for which such benefits are not
payable due to SGA or earnings.
In these final rules, we are modifying the definition of the
``outcome payment system'' in Sec. 411.500(c) to clarify that this
payment system provides for a schedule of payments to an EN for each
[[Page 67382]]
month, during an individual's outcome payment period, for which Social
Security disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits are not
payable to the individual because of work or earnings. We are also
expanding Sec. 411.500 in these final rules to include definitions of
``outcome payment'' and ``outcome payment month.'' In final
Sec. 411.500(d), we explain that ``outcome payment'' means a payment
for an outcome payment month. In final Sec. 411.500(e), we explain that
``outcome payment month'' means a month, during an individual's outcome
payment period, for which Social Security disability benefits and
Federal SSI cash benefits are not payable to the individual because of
work or earnings. Final Sec. 411.500(e) also explains that the maximum
number of outcome payment months for each ticket is 60. This provision
appeared in Sec. 411.500(c) of the proposed rules. We are moving the
provision to Sec. 411.500(e) of the final rules where we explain what
we mean by an outcome payment month.
Final Sec. 411.500(f), which we proposed as Sec. 411.500(d),
provides a general description of the term ``outcome-milestone payment
system.'' This payment system provides a schedule of payments to an EN
that includes, in addition to payments during the outcome payment
period, payment for completion by a beneficiary of up to four
milestones directed toward the goal of permanent employment. In these
final rules, we are increasing the number of milestones for which
payment may be made under the outcome-milestone payment system from the
two milestones we proposed in the NPRM to four milestones. This is one
of four major changes we are making to the outcome-milestone payment
system in response to public comments, all of which we discuss more
fully below.
In addition, in these final rules we are modifying final
Sec. 411.500(f) to clarify that the milestones for which payment may be
made must occur prior to the beginning of an individual's outcome
payment period. We are also clarifying that the payments which may be
made to an EN under the outcome-milestone payment system consist of
milestone payments which may be made for any milestones occurring prior
to the individual's outcome payment period, as well as any outcome
payments which may be made for months during the individual's outcome
payment period. We deleted the last sentence in proposed section
411.500(d) that compared the total payments under the outcome-milestone
payment system, because this is stated in section 411.525(a).
Section 1148(c) of the Act permits each State VR agency to
participate in the program as an EN with respect to a disabled
beneficiary. When the State VR agency elects to participate in the
Ticket to Work program as an EN with respect to a disabled beneficiary,
we will pay the State VR agency in accordance with its elected EN
payment system. If the State VR agency chooses not to participate as an
EN with respect to a disabled beneficiary, we will pay the State VR
agency for services provided to that beneficiary in accordance with the
cost reimbursement payment system under sections 222(d) and 1615(d) and
(e) of the Act. Our regulations concerning this cost reimbursement
payment system are at 20 CFR 404.2101 through 404.2127 and 416.2201
through 416.2227. Payments to State VR agencies under the Ticket to
Work program are discussed in Secs. 411.510 and 411.585.
Each provider will elect, in writing, the EN payment system which
it will be paid under when it agrees to become an EN. Similarly, each
State VR agency will notify us in writing regarding which EN payment
system it will use when it chooses to function as an EN for a
beneficiary with a ticket. We will periodically offer each EN
(including each State VR agency) the opportunity to change its elected
payment system. If the EN (or State VR agency) does change its elected
payment system, the change will apply only to tickets assigned to the
EN (or State VR agency) after SSA is notified about the change in the
elected payment system. These provisions, including the frequency of
opportunity for an EN to change its payment system, are discussed in
Secs. 411.505 through 411.520.
In the final rule, we are making a number of changes to
Secs. 411.505 through 411.520. These changes correct grammatical errors
and clarify our intentions, but do not change the intent of the
proposed sections.
In final Sec. 411.505 we are combining the first two
sentences concerning an EN's choice of payment systems into one
sentence.
In final Sec. 411.510(b) we are placing a new
parenthetical sentence between the two sentences we proposed. The first
sentence of this paragraph explains that a State VR agency must
communicate its decision to serve a beneficiary to the PM. The new
second sentence provides a reference to that portion of the final rule
where we discuss the PM and its role in the Ticket to Work program.
In final Sec. 411.515(a) we are making some editorial
changes to the second sentence and clarifying the third sentence to
note what day in the month an EN's payment system election becomes
effective. Also, we are adding a new sentence to the end of this
paragraph which clarifies that a State VR agency may also change its
elected EN payment system.
In final Sec. 411.515(b) we are making some editorial
changes and expanding the explanation of when the 12-month period for
making a change in an EN payment system for any reason ends. We had
proposed that the period would end with the 12th month following the
month in which the EN first elects an EN payment system. The final rule
adds an alternative month, the 12th month after the month we implement
the Ticket to Work program in the State in which the EN (or State VR
agency) operates, if it is later.
In final Sec. 411.515(c) we are correcting grammatical
errors and deleting the date in the last sentence because it is
unnecessary. This sentence notes that we will offer ENs the opportunity
to make a change in their elected payment systems at least every 18
months.
In final Sec. 411.520 we are correcting grammatical errors
in the title and text and clarifying that the rule applies to State VR
agencies as well as to ENs.
Sections 411.525 through 411.565 provide our rules for computing
payments to ENs under the two EN payment systems. They also describe
what payments may be made and when, and discuss allocating payments to
multiple ENs to whom the ticket was assigned at different times.
Sections 1148(h)(2) and (h)(3) of the Act provide that the outcome
payment system and the outcome-milestone payment system shall provide
for a schedule of payments to an EN, in connection with a beneficiary
who assigns a ticket to the EN, for each month, during the individual's
outcome payment period, for which Social Security disability benefits
and Federal SSI cash benefits based on disability or blindness are not
payable to the individual because of work or earnings. There can be a
maximum of 60 outcome payment months and, therefore, a maximum of 60
monthly outcome payments. In Sec. 411.525(a), we explain that we will
calculate payments for outcome payment months under both EN payment
systems using the payment calculation base as defined in
Sec. 411.500(a)(1) or (a)(2). We deleted the second sentence in
proposed Sec. 411.525(a). The proposed sentence referred to the fact
that the payment
[[Page 67383]]
calculation base we use to compute the value of payments for outcome
months attained in one calendar year is based on the preceding calendar
year's national average disability benefit payment information. This is
simply a restatement of the definition of the payment calculation base
that is found in the references cited in the first sentence of
Sec. 411.525(a), which we did not change.
Section 411.525(a)(1)(i) discusses payments under the outcome
payment system, explaining that an EN is eligible for a monthly outcome
payment for each month for which Social Security disability benefits
and Federal SSI cash benefits are not payable to the individual because
of work or earnings. This section also provides that monthly payments
under the outcome payment system will be 40 percent of the payment
calculation base. This percentage is the maximum the law allows at the
beginning of the program. Under the outcome payment system, each
monthly outcome payment is the same during a calendar year. At the end
of each calendar year, we will refigure the payment calculation base
for the next year. For clarity, we combined the last two sentences of
proposed Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(i) and added a reference to Sec. 411.550.
We also noted that we will round our computation of the outcome payment
to the nearest whole dollar.
Section 411.525(a)(1)(ii) provides criteria for determining whether
a month occurring after the month in which a beneficiary's entitlement
to Social Security disability benefits ends or eligibility for SSI
benefits based on disability or blindness terminates due to work
activity or earnings will be considered to be an outcome payment month.
We are making two changes to the rules we proposed. First, in final
Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(ii), we are substituting the word ``with'' for the
word ``in'' to clarify that the months we are talking about are those
after the month ``with'' which such entitlement ends or eligibility
terminates. Second, in Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(ii)(A), we are clarifying
that the level of earnings required must be more than the SGA threshold
amount specified in 20 CFR 404.1574(b)(2) (or 20 CFR 404.1584(d) for
individuals who are statutorily blind). We had proposed that earnings
could be at or above the SGA dollar amount, but this is ambiguous in
that earnings at the dollar amount specified in 20 CFR 404.1574(b)(2)
and 404.1584(d) are not indicative of SGA, while earnings above the SGA
threshold amounts in the referenced rules are. It was our intent in
this section, as well as in proposed Sec. 411.535, to require that
earnings exceed the monthly SGA threshold amount.
As a result of these changes, final Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(ii) provides
two criteria for us to use when determining whether we will consider
any month after the month with which disability entitlement ends or
eligibility terminates because of work or earnings to be an outcome
payment month. First, the individual must have gross earnings from
employment (or net earnings from self-employment) in that month that
are more than the SGA threshold dollar amount in 20 CFR 404.1574(b)(2)
(for an individual who is not statutorily blind) or in 20 CFR
404.1584(d) (for an individual who is statutorily blind). Second, the
individual cannot be entitled to any monthly benefits under title II or
eligible for any benefits under title XVI for that month.
Section 411.525(a)(2) explains what payments we can make to an EN
under the outcome-milestone payment system. This system provides
payments to an EN when the beneficiary achieves milestones directed
toward the goal of permanent employment. Payments for the milestones
achieved come before, and are in addition to, outcome payments made
during the outcome payment period. For clarity, we inserted a new
sentence after the first one we proposed. It notes that milestones must
occur prior to the beginning of the beneficiary's outcome payment
period and meet the requirements of Sec. 411.535. Also, consistent with
changes we are making elsewhere in these final rules, we are amending
the first sentence of Sec. 411.525(a)(2) to state that we may pay an EN
for up to four milestones achieved by a beneficiary who assigned his or
her ticket to the EN.
Section 411.525(b) explains the provision in section 1148(h)(3)(C)
of the Act concerning the limitation on total payments to an EN under
the outcome-milestone payment system. The Act requires us to design the
outcome-milestone payment system so that an EN's total payments with
respect to each beneficiary is less than, on a net present value basis,
the total amount the EN would receive if paid under the outcome payment
system. In the second sentence of Sec. 411.525(b) we explain that an
EN's total potential payments under the outcome-milestone payment
system will be about 85 percent of the total that would be payable
under the outcome payment system for the same beneficiary.
Section 411.525(c) explains that we will pay an EN to whom a ticket
has been assigned only for milestones or outcomes that are achieved
prior to the month in which an individual's ticket terminates, as
described in Sec. 411.155. We will not pay milestone or outcome
payments based on an individual's work activity or earnings in or after
the month a ticket terminates.
Sections 411.530 through 411.545 provide our rules for computing
payments to ENs under the outcome-milestone payment system. In response
to the public comments, we are making four major changes to this EN
payment system.
First, we are adding two milestones. We describe them in
Sec. 411.535.
Second, we are doubling the total value of the potential
milestone payments. We provide these payment amounts in Sec. 411.540.
Third, we are spreading, over 60 months as opposed to 12,
the outcome payment reductions made on account of milestone payments
received. We discuss this reduction in Sec. 411.530.
Fourth, we are substituting a flat outcome payment rate of
34 percent for the graduated monthly outcome payments we proposed. We
discuss how we calculate the payment amounts for outcome payment months
under the outcome-milestone payment system in Sec. 411.545.
Section 411.530 describes how we will reduce outcome payments under
the outcome-milestone payment system when an EN receives milestone
payments. In the NPRM, we proposed to reduce the first 12 outcome
payments by the amount paid out as milestone payments. However, in
response to public comments, we are extending the reduction period over
the full 60 months of the outcome payment period. In addition, we are
clarifying two points in final Sec. 411.530. First, we explain that an
EN's outcome payments will be reduced due to the milestone payments
received by that EN, not due to milestone payments paid to another EN.
Second, we are broadening the language in the final rule by deleting
the word ``already'' from the language we proposed. This change allows
for adjustments should we make a retroactive payment for a milestone
that a beneficiary achieved before the outcome payment period began.
Section 411.535 provides the milestone requirements. We are making
three changes to this section. First, we are clarifying that the
milestones occur after the date on which the ticket was first assigned
and the beneficiary starts to work. Just as the outcome payment period
cannot begin until after the date the beneficiary first assigns a
ticket, a beneficiary cannot begin to attain a milestone until after he
or she first assigns the ticket. Second, as we explained in the changes
we are making
[[Page 67384]]
to Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(ii)(A), we are clarifying that the level of a
beneficiary's monthly earnings required for a milestone must be more
than the SGA threshold amount. Third, we are including two additional
milestones. The first milestone we are adding is met when a beneficiary
works for one calendar month and has gross earnings from employment (or
net earnings from self-employment) for that month that are more than
the SGA threshold amount. The other milestone we are adding, which is
the fourth milestone, is met when a beneficiary works for 12 calendar
months within a 15-month period and has gross earnings from employment
(or net earnings from self-employment) for each of the 12 months that
are more than the SGA threshold amount. As a result of these additions,
we are renumbering proposed milestones one and two as final milestones
two and three. These milestones also require work at more than the SGA
threshold amount for three and seven months, respectively, within a 12-
month period. Additionally, in Sec. 411.535 we are providing that any
of the work months used to meet the first, second, or third milestone
may be used to meet a subsequent milestone.
Section 411.540 provides how we will calculate the payment for each
milestone. In the proposed rules we provided for the payment of two
milestones and based their calculation on a percentage of the payment
calculation base that together represented approximately 10 percent of
the total payments possible under the outcome-milestone payment system.
In final Sec. 411.540 we are not changing our method of computing
milestone payments or revising the payment percentages for the two
milestones we proposed, but we are adding two more milestones and the
net effect is a doubling of the total value of the milestone payments.
The value of the first additional milestone payment is equal to 34
percent of the payment calculation base, and the value of the other
additional milestone payment is equal to 170 percent of the payment
calculation base. The total value of the additional milestone payments
is equal to approximately 10 percent of the potential payments possible
under the outcome-milestone payment system. When combined with the
total value of the milestone payments we originally proposed and which
we are retaining in these final rules, the total value of the four
potential milestone payments under the outcome-milestone payment system
is equal to approximately 20 percent of the total possible payments
available under the outcome-milestone payment system.
We are also making four other changes to final Sec. 411.540. First,
we are stating that after we multiply the applicable milestone
percentage by the payment calculation base, we will round the resulting
milestone payment computation to the nearest whole dollar. Second, we
are adding two paragraphs that identify the attainment month for each
of the two additional milestones. This month is important because we
use the payment calculation base for the calendar year in which the
attainment month occurs when computing the milestone payment. Third, we
are redesignating proposed paragraphs (a) and (b) as paragraphs (b) and
(c) and proposed paragraphs (c) and (d) as paragraphs (f) and (g).
These paragraphs discuss the payment calculations and attainment months
for the two milestones we proposed. Fourth, we are deleting the second
sentence we proposed in paragraphs (a) and (b), now final paragraphs
(b) and (c). The sentence referred to the two proposed milestone
payments as being equal to two and four outcome payments, respectively.
Technically, this is an incorrect statement because outcome payments
under the outcome-milestone payment system will vary depending on how
much has been paid in milestone payments.
Section 411.545 states how, under the outcome-milestone payment
system, we will calculate the amount of the outcome payment. We had
proposed graduated monthly outcome payments. However, in response to
public comments, we are substituting a flat outcome payment rate for
the one we proposed. This rate is 34 percent of the payment calculation
base for the calendar year in which the outcome payment month occurs,
rounded to the nearest whole dollar, and then reduced, if necessary, as
described in Sec. 411.530. This flat rate makes the total potential
payments under the outcome-milestone payment system about 85 percent of
the total potential payments that could be made under the outcome
payment system. We did not change the rate differential between the two
EN payment systems as many commenters suggested and explain our reasons
for this in the responses to the public comments below.
Section 411.550 provides the payment amounts for outcome payment
months under the outcome payment system. An outcome payment under the
outcome payment system is equal to 40 percent of the applicable payment
calculation base. Consistent with clarifications we are making in
Secs. 411.540 and 411.545, we are modifying Sec. 411.550 to state that
we will round our computation of the outcome payment to the nearest
whole dollar.
Section 411.555 provides that an EN may generally keep the
milestone and outcome payments it receives under its elected EN payment
system, even if the beneficiary does not sustain work for all 60
outcome payment months. The proposed rules for this section, by
reference to Sec. 411.560, indicated that retroactive adjustments to
payments already received by ENs may occur when we allocate a prior
payment with another EN. In the final rules, we expand Sec. 411.555. We
placed the general rule allowing ENs to keep the milestone and outcome
payments for which they are eligible in paragraph (a) and added
paragraphs (b) and (c). Paragraph (b) discusses the adjustments we may
have to make should we determine that we paid an EN an incorrect
amount. Paragraph (c) refers to the EN notification and dispute
resolution process we have for overpayments and underpayments.
Sections 411.560 and 411.565 explain that it is possible to pay
more than one EN for the same milestone or outcome payment month. In
this situation, the payment will be allocated among the ENs that
qualify for payment. Section 1148(e)(3) of the Act provides that the PM
will determine the allocation based on the services provided by each
EN. It also is possible to pay more than one EN for different
milestones or outcome payment months on the same ticket. When more than
one EN is eligible for payment with respect to a ticket, we will pay
each EN in accordance with its elected payment system at the time the
ticket was assigned to each EN.
In response to public comments, we are expanding the discussion in
the last sentence of proposed Sec. 411.560 to clarify how the PM will
make a payment allocation determination when more than one EN qualifies
for a payment. The PM will base its determination on the contribution
of services provided by each EN toward the achievement of the outcomes
or milestones. Also, outcome and milestone payments will not be
increased because the payments are shared between two ENs. In addition
to these changes, we are correcting grammatical errors in the title of
Sec. 411.565.
Section 411.570 provides that the Act prohibits an EN from
requesting or accepting compensation from a beneficiary for the EN's
services.
Section 411.575 describes how an EN will request payment for either
a milestone payment or an outcome payment month. The EN will make a
[[Page 67385]]
written request to the PM for payment for each milestone. The request
will be accompanied by evidence showing that the milestone was
achieved. We do not have to stop a beneficiary's monthly cash payment
in order to pay a milestone payment to an EN.
For outcome payments under either EN payment system, an EN must
also submit a written request for payment to the PM. Since outcome
payments cannot be made unless the beneficiary has sufficient work or
earnings to reduce the Federal cash benefits to zero, we are retaining
the general requirement we proposed for an EN's payment request to be
accompanied by evidence of the beneficiary's work or earnings. However,
in response to public comments, we are making three changes to
Sec. 411.575(b). First, we are providing an exception to the general
requirement for evidence of a beneficiary's work or earnings in order
to cover those situations in which the EN requesting the payment does
not currently hold the ticket because it is unassigned or reassigned to
another EN. Second, we are allowing the EN to submit its request for
payment and evidence of work or earnings on a quarterly basis, rather
than on a monthly or bimonthly basis as we proposed. Third, we are
incorporating the rules we proposed in Secs. 411.575(b)(3) through (5)
in Sec. 411.575(b)(3), and deleting Secs. 411.575(b)(3) through (5).
In addition to these changes, we are making other clarifying
changes to Sec. 411.575. We are adding three new paragraphs at
Sec. 411.575(a)(1)(ii), (iii) and (iv) to discuss the requirements for
an EN to receive a milestone payment. These requirements are: (1) The
milestone must occur prior to the outcome payment period as defined in
Sec. 411.500(b), (2) the provisions in Sec. 411.535 must be satisfied,
and (3) the milestone cannot occur in or after the month in which the
ticket terminates as defined in Sec. 411.155. We also are modifying the
language in final Sec. 411.575(a)(1)(i), which was proposed as
Sec. 411.575(a)(1). The revised language clarifies that we will pay an
EN for milestones only if the EN's elected payment system in effect at
the time the beneficiary assigned the ticket to the EN was the outcome-
milestone payment system. The wording we proposed had suggested that
the payment system election and ticket assignment had to occur
simultaneously and this was incorrect. Finally, we added paragraph
(b)(1)(iii) to final Sec. 411.575 to clarify that in addition to the
other requirements listed, we will pay an EN for an outcome payment
month only if the ticket has not terminated for any of the reasons
listed in Sec. 411.155.
Section 411.580 explains that an EN must first have had the ticket
assigned to it before it can be eligible to receive milestone or
outcome payments.
As a beneficiary is free to choose where to assign a ticket, the
opening paragraph of Sec. 411.585 explains that a State VR agency and
an EN can both be eligible for payment on a ticket if the State VR
agency elects to be paid as an EN. Each entity can be paid as an EN
under its respective EN payment system. If the State VR agency chooses
to serve a beneficiary with a ticket and to be paid under the cost
reimbursement payment system, then we will pay the State VR agency
under the cost reimbursement payment system if it meets the criteria
for reimbursement and if we have not first paid an EN under its elected
payment system with respect to the same beneficiary and ticket. For
each ticket, a payment either under the cost reimbursement payment
system or under an elected EN payment system will exclude any payment
under the other payment system. Absent this restriction, it would be
possible to pay separately under both the cost reimbursement payment
system and under the EN payment systems such amounts as, when combined,
would exceed the statutory limitation of one or both of these payment
systems for serving the same beneficiary under the same ticket.
In response to a public comment, we are cross-referring
Sec. 411.560 in the opening paragraph of Sec. 411.585. Section 411.560
explains how the PM will make a determination of payment allocation
should more than one entity qualify for payment as an EN.
Section 411.587 is a new section that we are adding in response to
a comment. It explains which provider we will pay if, with respect to
the same ticket, we receive two requests for payment and one request is
from a provider that elected an EN payment system and the other request
is from a State VR agency that elected payment under the cost
reimbursement payment system.
Section 411.590 describes what an EN or State VR agency serving as
an EN can do if either disagrees with our decision on a payment request
it submits. This section also explains that an EN cannot appeal our
determination about a beneficiary's right to benefits even when that
determination affects the payment to an EN. In the final rules, we are
broadening paragraph (d) of Sec. 411.590 to clarify that any
determination we make about a beneficiary's right to disability cash
benefits, not just a determination that a beneficiary appeals, could
affect an EN's payment or result in an adjustment to payments already
made to an EN. In addition, we made some editorial changes throughout
this section.
Section 411.595 identifies various methods we will use to monitor
the EN payment systems for financial integrity. Section 411.597 states
that we will periodically review the conditions affecting payment under
the two EN payment systems to determine if these payment systems are
providing adequate incentives and appropriate economies for ENs to
assist beneficiaries to enter the workforce.
Subpart I--Ticket to Work Program Dispute Resolution
Section 1148(d)(7) of the Act requires us to provide for a
mechanism for resolving disputes between beneficiaries and ENs, between
ENs and PMs, and between PMs and service providers. As part of this
process, we are required to provide a party to a dispute a reasonable
opportunity for a full and fair review of the matter in dispute.
Finally, beneficiaries and State VR agencies may have disputes. The
various dispute resolution mechanisms are discussed below.
PM and EN Disputes With SSA
Since PMs and ENs, other than State VR agencies functioning as ENs,
will operate under contracts with SSA, disputes between SSA and PMs and
between SSA and ENs that are not State VR agencies will be subject to
the dispute resolution procedures contained in the contracts with SSA.
Disputes between Beneficiaries and ENs That Are Not State VR
Agencies
There is a three-step process for resolving disputes between
beneficiaries and ENs that are not State VR agencies. This three-step
process will ensure that both beneficiaries and ENs have the
opportunity to resolve disputes using informal means.
As a first step in the dispute resolution process, each EN is
required to have an internal grievance procedure whereby beneficiaries
have the opportunity to work with representatives of the EN to try to
resolve any disputes arising during the implementation or amending of
an IWP. If the dispute is not resolved using the EN's internal
grievance procedures, both the beneficiary and the EN will have the
option of contacting the PM for assistance in resolving the dispute.
Upon request, the PM will conduct a full review of the matter in
dispute and
[[Page 67386]]
make a recommendation to the beneficiary and the EN as to how the
dispute might be resolved (see Sec. 411.615). This second step is
intended to provide the parties to the dispute the opportunity to
present their case before an impartial third party, the PM. The third
step involves bringing the dispute to SSA.
Section 411.605 explains the responsibilities of an EN that is not
a State VR agency regarding this dispute resolution process, including
informing beneficiaries of the availability of assistance from the
State Protection and Advocacy (P&A) system at every step in the dispute
resolution process. Section 411.610 identifies specific points in the
rehabilitation process when an EN that is not a State VR agency must
inform beneficiaries about the procedures for resolving disputes.
Section 411.615 describes how a disputed issue will be referred to
the PM, including what information should be submitted. Section 411.620
tells how long the PM has to provide a written recommendation on how to
resolve the dispute. Section 411.625 explains that if the parties to
the dispute do not agree with the PM's recommendation and the dispute
continues to be unresolved, either the beneficiary or the EN that is
not a State VR agency has the option of bringing the dispute to the
attention of SSA for resolution.
Section 411.625 also describes the information that must be
submitted to SSA to facilitate our review of the dispute. Section
411.630 explains that SSA's decision is final.
Section 411.635 explains that a beneficiary has the right to be
represented in the dispute resolution process under the Ticket to Work
program and that the State P&A system is available to provide
assistance and advocacy services to beneficiaries seeking or receiving
services from ENs operating under the Ticket to Work program.
Disputes Between ENs and PMs
Section 411.650 explains that a dispute between an EN that is not a
State VR agency and the PM, that does not involve an EN's payment
request, will be resolved using the procedures for resolving disputes
developed by the PM. If the matter cannot be resolved using these
procedures, it will be forwarded to SSA for resolution. Section 411.655
explains how a PM will refer disputes to us. Section 411.660 explains
that SSA's decision on a dispute between an EN that is not a State VR
agency and a PM is final.
A dispute over a payment request submitted by an EN, including a
State VR agency serving as an EN, will be resolved using the dispute
resolution procedures contained in Sec. 411.590.
Disputes Between Service Providers and PMs
We are required to provide a mechanism for resolving disputes
between service providers and PMs. Most service providers approved to
serve beneficiaries under the Ticket to Work program will be serving as
ENs. Disputes between ENs and PMs over payments are discussed in
subpart H. Other disputes between ENs and PMs are discussed above, and
in Secs. 411.650, 411.655, and 411.660. State VR agencies that choose
not to serve beneficiaries with tickets as ENs will be the only other
service providers having a relationship with a PM under the Ticket to
Work program. Disputes between a State VR agency that is not
functioning as an EN and a PM, that involve issues related to ticket
assignment and do not involve a request for payment or other
reimbursement issue, will be handled in accordance with the PM's
dispute resolution procedures. A dispute over a payment request
submitted by a State VR agency which is serving a beneficiary with a
ticket under the vocational rehabilitation cost reimbursement system
(see sections 222(d) and 1615(d) of the Social Security Act) will be
resolved under existing regulations governing the resolution of
disputes regarding a payment request (see 20 CFR Secs. 404.2127(a) and
416.2227(a)).
Disputes Between Beneficiaries and State VR Agencies
Section 411.640 explains that the dispute resolution procedures in
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.),
apply to any dispute arising between a disabled beneficiary and a State
VR agency, regardless of whether the services are being provided under
one of the EN payment systems or under the cost reimbursement payment
system authorized under sections 222(d) and 1615(d) of the Social
Security Act.
In response to comments on the proposed rules, we are revising
rules in subpart I (Secs. 411.600, 411.605, 411.610, 411.615, 411.625,
411.630, 411.635, 411.640, and 411.650) to clarify whether they refer
to ENs that are not State VR agencies, or those that are State VR
agencies.
Subpart J--The Ticket to Work Program and Alternate Participants
Under the Programs for Payments for Vocational Rehabilitation
Services
Section 101(d) of Public Law 106-170 provides for a graduated
implementation of the Ticket to Work Program. By January 1, 2004, the
program will be operating in all States and U.S. territories.
Section 1148(d)(4)(B) of the Act requires the Commissioner, in any
State where the Ticket to Work program is implemented, to enter into
agreements with any alternate participant that is operating under the
authority of section 222(d)(2) of the Act in the State as of the date
of enactment of Public Law 106-170 if the alternate participant chooses
to serve as an EN under the program.
Subpart J of these regulations describes how implementation of the
Ticket to Work program affects the current alternate participant
payment programs under 20 CFR 404.2101 et seq. and 416.2201 et seq.
Section 411.700 explains what an alternate participant is. Sections
411.705 and 411.710 explain that an approved alternate participant has
the option of becoming an EN when the Ticket to Work program is
implemented in a State and tells an alternate participant what it must
do to become an EN. Sections 411.715 through 411.730 describe how the
transition process will occur for alternate participants who choose to
become ENs. These sections explain how SSA will handle payments related
to beneficiaries who were being served by alternate participants under
existing employment plans prior to the Ticket to Work program being
implemented in the State and the alternate participant becoming an EN.
These sections also provide that SSA will not provide reimbursement for
any services provided to a beneficiary under the alternate participant
payment system after December 31, 2003.
Public Comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
When we published the NPRM in the Federal Register on December 28,
2000 (65 FR 82844), we provided interested parties 60 days to submit
comments. We received comments from over 400 commenters, including
national, State and community-based agencies and private organizations
serving people with disabilities, beneficiaries, and other individuals.
We considered carefully the comments we received on the proposed rules
in publishing these final regulations. The comments we received and our
responses to the comments are set forth below. Although
[[Page 67387]]
we condensed, summarized, or paraphrased the comments, we believe that
we have expressed the views accurately and have responded to all of the
relevant issues raised.
Comments and Responses
Subpart B--Tickets Under the Ticket to Work Program
Comment: Several commenters indicated that we should delay the
issuance of tickets until these final regulations were published.
Response: After consideration of the public comments on our
proposed rules as well as other views on the best time to begin the
release of the tickets, we have decided to delay releasing tickets
until after these final regulations are effective. These regulations
are effective 30 days after the date of their publication in the
Federal Register. We believe that this will allow for the development
of an infrastructure of public and private sector employment networks
to serve beneficiaries who receive a ticket. We also believe that it is
critical to issue tickets as soon as possible after these regulations
are effective.
Section 411.120 What Is a Ticket Under the Ticket to Work Program
Comment: One commenter suggested that, in the interest of making
these regulations user-friendly, we add a cross-reference from
Sec. 411.120, regarding what is a ticket under the Ticket to Work
Program, to Sec. 411.140, which describes when an individual can assign
the ticket.
Response: We are not adopting this comment. However, we agree that
this section requires clarification to include a more complete
description of the format and wording of the ticket, as provided by
section 101(e)(2) of Public Law 106-170. Accordingly, we have expanded
Sec. 411.120 in the final rules to include a fuller description of the
format and wording of the ticket.
Section 411.125 Who is Eligible To Receive a Ticket Under the Ticket
to Work Program?
Comment: We received many comments in response to proposed
Sec. 411.125(a)(1) which provided that an individual will be eligible
to receive a ticket in a month in which he or she is age 18 or older
and has not attained age 65. Some commenters agreed that it would not
be appropriate to provide transitional youth with tickets, as it might
interfere with their pursuit of an education. The majority of
commenters, though, indicated that we should allow individuals under
age 18 access to a Ticket, to try to ensure that they do not begin a
life-long dependency on public benefits.
Response: As we indicated in the Preamble to the proposed rules, as
we gain experience with the Ticket to Work program, we plan, at a later
time, to explore the possibility of expanding the age criteria for
receiving a ticket to include those SSI beneficiaries age 16 and older
who are eligible for disability benefit payments based on the childhood
disability standard. While we are not adopting the recommendation to
provide these individuals with tickets in these final rules, we are
publishing a separate notice in this issue of the Federal Register to
request public input for our consideration in developing possible
approaches to serve the needs of transition-age youth with disabilities
who are receiving payments under programs we administer under the Act.
Comment: Proposed Sec. 411.125(a)(3)(i) and (ii) provide that an
individual will only be eligible for a ticket in a month in which our
records show that the individual's case has not been designated as a
medical improvement expected (MIE) diary review case, or that we have
conducted at least one continuing disability review (CDR) on such an
individual and have made a final determination or decision that
disability continues. Many commenters stated that we should provide
tickets to beneficiaries regardless of whether they have been
designated as a medical improvement expected diary review case. They
stated that the MIE categorization is an administrative convenience to
determine the frequency of CDRs, and is not a sufficiently precise tool
to deny beneficiaries immediate access to a ticket. Others indicated
that SSA should examine, on a disability-by-disability basis, which
people whose cases have been designated as a MIE diary case are likely
to remain on the rolls after initial CDR, and issue those people a
ticket. Other commenters indicated that the majority of individuals
designated as MIE remain on the rolls after the first CDR, and that we
would, therefore, needlessly be delaying the opportunity to participate
in the Ticket to Work program for these individuals.
Response: We are not adopting this comment. As we indicated in the
Preamble of the proposed rules, ``Because these beneficiaries have
conditions that are expected to medically improve in a relatively short
period of time, they could be expected to return to work without the
need for services under the Ticket to Work program.'' Moreover, we do
not believe, as some commenters stated, that the MIE classification is
merely an ``administrative convenience'' and that it, therefore, has no
relevance for determining who gets a ticket.
We also believe that using a medical improvement diary system to
help identify beneficiaries who should receive tickets is the most
administratively feasible approach currently available to us. We
believe that the approach outlined in the proposed rules, and provided
in these final rules, strikes the proper balance between equitable
treatment of disability beneficiaries and ensuring, to the extent
possible, that the resources that will be available in the Ticket to
Work program are distributed in the most effective and efficient
manner.
We believe that the use of the medical improvement diary system is
the most practical and efficient means available to identify those
beneficiaries with impairments that are expected to improve within a
relatively short period of time so as to permit the individual to
engage in SGA. However, we believe that it may be possible to find ways
to improve that system for its use in connection with the Ticket to
Work program. Therefore, we plan to conduct an evaluation of the
methodology for the existing MIE category within the CDR classification
system to assess possible ways to improve the system for use in
identifying those beneficiaries for whom near-term medical improvement
should preclude the immediate receipt of a Ticket.
Comment: Many commenters indicated that there should not be a limit
on the number of tickets a person can receive in a lifetime, as long as
a person is not using more than one ticket at a time. Other commenters
added that a person should be eligible for another ticket when the cash
value of the first one has been exhausted. They cited potential
inequities involving beneficiaries (1) Whose benefits are reinstated
under the provisions of section 223(i) or 1631(p) of the Act (as added
by section 112 of Public Law 106-170); (2) who retain eligibility under
section 1619(b) of the Act; and (3) who receive services from the State
VR agency that elects payment under the cost reimbursement payment
system.
Response: As in the proposed rules, Sec. 411.125(b) of the final
rules does not limit the total number of tickets that an individual may
be eligible to receive during his or her lifetime under the Ticket to
Work program. Rather, consistent with section 1148 of the Act, the
regulation limits the number of tickets an individual may receive
during any period during which the individual is either a title II
disability beneficiary
[[Page 67388]]
or a title XVI disability beneficiary and his or her title XVI
eligibility has not terminated. If an individual's entitlement to title
II benefits based on disability or eligibility for title XVI benefits
based on disability or blindness terminates, and the individual again
becomes entitled to or eligible for benefits, the individual may be
eligible to receive a new ticket.
Section 411.125(b) of the final regulations provides that an
individual will not be eligible to receive more than one ticket during
any period during which the individual is either: (1) Entitled to title
II benefits based on disability; or (2) eligible for title XVI benefits
based on disability or blindness and the eligibility has not
terminated. This rule is based on section 1148 of the Act, which
authorizes the Commissioner to issue ``a ticket'' to disabled
beneficiaries for participation in the Ticket to Work program. The Act
defines ``disabled beneficiary'' for purposes of this section to mean
``a title II disability beneficiary or a title XVI disability
beneficiary.'' Section 1148 of the Act also provides that an individual
is a title II disability beneficiary for each month for which the
individual is entitled to title II benefits based on disability as
described in that section. This section also indicates that an
individual is a title XVI disability beneficiary for each month for
which the individual is eligible for a Federal cash benefit under
section 1611 or 1619(a) of the Act based on disability or blindness.
In addition, section 1148 of the Act indicates that an individual
may be issued only one ticket while he or she is a disabled
beneficiary. That section provides that the limitation on the total
number of outcome payments that may be paid to an EN applies with
respect to each beneficiary. Section 1148 also authorizes the
Commissioner to pay an outcome payment to an EN, ``in connection with
each individual who is a beneficiary, for each month, during the
individual's outcome payment period, for which benefits . . . are not
payable. * * *'' This section indicates that each individual who is a
beneficiary has one outcome payment period, consisting of 60 months.
Thus, under section 1148 of the Act, the Commissioner is authorized to
pay a maximum of 60 outcome payments to an EN with respect to each
individual who is a beneficiary. Accordingly, the final regulations
provide that an individual may not receive more than one ticket during
any period during which the individual is either a title II disability
beneficiary or a title XVI disability beneficiary and his or her title
XVI eligibility has not terminated.
We are adding a provision to Sec. 411.125 in these final rules to
clarify that individuals whose entitlement to title II benefits based
on disability is reinstated under section 223(i) of the Act, or whose
eligibility for title XVI benefits based on disability or blindness is
reinstated under section 1631(p) of the Act, will be eligible to
receive another ticket in the first month he or she is entitled to or
is eligible for reinstated benefits, as long as the beneficiary meets
certain other requirements for eligibility for a ticket.
Comment: Many commenters stated that SSA must address issues
specifically related to individuals who are entitled to child's
insurance benefits as disabled adult children (DACs). They indicated
that our title II program regulations should allow these beneficiaries
to move on and off the title II program (in other words, to have their
benefits reinstated) to the same extent that other beneficiaries with
disabilities are allowed to do so. Otherwise, they argue, the purpose
of the Ticket program will be thwarted.
Response: Section 202(d)(1)(B) of the Act provides that an
individual who is an adult child (18 years old or older) of an insured
person who is entitled to old-age or disability benefits, or who has
died, is eligible for benefits if the individual is unmarried and has a
disability that began before the individual is 22 years old. Under the
provisions of section 202(d)(6) of the Act, an individual whose
entitlement to child's insurance benefits based on disability has
terminated may again become entitled to such benefits if he or she has
not married and he or she is under a disability which began before the
end of the 84th month following the month in which his or her most
recent entitlement to child's insurance benefits terminated because he
or she ceased to be under a disability. Therefore, these individuals
would be eligible to receive another ticket in the first month they
again become entitled to benefits, as long as they meet all other
requirements for eligibility for a ticket.
Further, such individuals whose benefits are reinstated under
section 223(i) of the Act also will be eligible to receive another
ticket in the first month they are entitled to reinstated benefits, as
long as they meet certain other requirements for eligibility for a
ticket.
Comment: Several commenters stated that we should eliminate the
requirement in proposed Sec. 411.125(a)(2) that a beneficiary be in
current pay status in order to be eligible to receive a ticket. They
stated that this provision would disadvantage individuals who are in
overpayment, extended period of eligibility or 1619(b) status.
Response: The rule which provides that a disabled or blind title
XVI beneficiary may be eligible to receive a ticket only in a month in
which his or her Federal SSI cash benefits are not suspended is based
on section 1148 of the Act. Under section 1148, the Commissioner is
authorized to issue a ticket to a title XVI disability beneficiary for
participation in the Ticket to Work program. This section also provides
that an individual is a title XVI disability beneficiary for each month
for which the individual is eligible for a Federal cash benefit under
section 1611 or 1619(a) of the Act based on disability or blindness. If
payment of an individual's monthly Federal SSI cash benefits is
suspended under 20 CFR 416.1321-416.1330 due to ineligibility, such
individual is not a title XVI disability beneficiary for that month for
purposes of section 1148 of the Act since he or she is not eligible for
Federal SSI cash benefits.
We are providing a similar requirement regarding current pay status
for title II disability beneficiaries to make the criteria for issuing
a ticket the same for title II beneficiaries as for title XVI
beneficiaries. This will provide consistent and equitable treatment of
beneficiaries under the two programs with respect to the issuance of
tickets. We also believe that limiting the issuance of tickets to title
II disability beneficiaries who are receiving cash benefits is
consistent with the purpose of the Ticket to Work program, which is to
enable beneficiaries to seek the services they need to return to work
and reduce their dependency on cash benefits. In addition, we believe
that providing tickets only to title II disability beneficiaries who
are receiving title II cash benefits is consistent with Congress'
expectation regarding who would be eligible to participate in the
Ticket to Work program. In its report on the legislation to establish
the Ticket to Work program, the House of Representatives Committee on
Ways and Means explained that the legislation would ``define `disabled
beneficiary' for purposes of Program participation to include SSI
disability benefits recipients and Social Security beneficiaries
receiving disability insurance, disabled widow's, and childhood
disability benefits.'' (H.R. Rep. No. 393, 106th Cong., 1st Sess. 41
(1999).)
[[Page 67389]]
Section 411.140 When Can I Assign My Ticket and How?
Comment: One commenter indicated that we should revise proposed
Sec. 411.140(b) to clarify that individuals may assign the ticket to a
State VR agency if they are eligible to receive VR services according
to 34 CFR 361.42. The commenter also indicated that we should revise
Sec. 411.145(b) to clarify that a State VR agency does not have
discretion on when it will or will not serve an individual. Rather,
they indicated, Title I of the Rehabilitation Act provides that a VR
agency must cease providing services to individuals who are no longer
eligible for VR services. They further suggested that we revise both
Sec. 411.140(c) and 411.150(b) to reflect that the VR counselor must
agree to and sign an Individualized Plan for Employment.
Response: We agree, and we have made the appropriate changes to
Secs. 411.140, 411.145 and 411.150.
Section 411.150 Can I Reassign My Ticket to a Different EN or to the
State VR Agency?
Comment: Some commenters indicated that we should limit, in
Sec. 411.150, the reasons a beneficiary can reassign a ticket. They
also suggested that we impose limits as to how many times a beneficiary
will be allowed to reassign a ticket.
Response: Section 1148(e)(3) of the Act provides that the PM will
ensure that beneficiaries are allowed changes in ENs without being
deemed to have rejected services under the program. Therefore, we are
not adopting this comment.
Comment: We received a comment which we decided to group with the
comments on this section because it most closely related to reassigning
a ticket to a different EN or State VR agency. The commenter asked if,
from a State VR agency's perspective, a legal guardian's decisions with
regard to the Ticket to Work program would be controlling. For example,
would we require a legal guardian's permission before the ticket could
be taken back from one EN and reassigned to another?
Response: We assume that the commenter is referring to a court-
appointed legal guardian of an individual who has been declared legally
incompetent. In such a case, the legal guardian is responsible for
making decisions on behalf of the individual and for exercising any
rights of such individual. In the Ticket to Work program, the court-
appointed legal guardian of a beneficiary who is legally incompetent
would be responsible for exercising the beneficiary's rights under the
program, including deciding whether the beneficiary's ticket should be
assigned or reassigned to an EN. In such circumstances, in order for
the beneficiary's ticket to be assigned or reassigned, the IWP under
which services are provided to the beneficiary by an EN must be agreed
to and signed by the beneficiary's court-appointed legal guardian.
According to the Rehabilitation Services Administration, the same would
be true for approval of an IPE under which services are provided by a
State VR agency. In the case of a beneficiary who is a legally
competent adult, it is up to the beneficiary to decide whether to
assign or reassign his or her ticket.
Section 411.155 When Does My Ticket Terminate?
Comment: One commenter stated that we should revise Sec. 411.155 to
indicate that we will pay a State VR agency after the month in which a
ticket terminates if the VR agency has elected and is eligible to claim
payment under the cost reimbursement payment system authorized under
sections 222(d) and 1615(d) and (e) of the Social Security Act. This
modification would clarify, according to the commenter, that if a state
VR agency chooses current law reimbursement, which is possible on a
case-by-case basis, the use of a ticket is not relevant, and the VR
agency can be paid for services.
Response: We do not agree with this recommendation to revise the
final rules because it is unnecessary. The final rules provide that we
will make payment to a State VR agency under the cost reimbursement
payment system if all of the following conditions exist: (1) the
beneficiary's ticket is assigned to the State VR agency under the rules
in subpart F; (2) the cost reimbursement payment system is the State VR
agency's payment system with respect to that beneficiary; (3) we have
not made payment to an EN or a State VR agency functioning as an EN
under one of the EN payment systems with respect to the ticket, as
discussed in Sec. 411.585; and (4) the requirements of sections 222(d)
and 1615(d) of the Act and applicable regulations relating to cost
reimbursement are met.
Subpart C--Suspension of Continuing Disability Reviews for
Beneficiaries Who Are Using a Ticket
Section 411.160 What Does This Subpart Do?
Comment: One commenter noted that the Ticket to Work program
exempts beneficiaries who are using a ticket from medical reviews, but
not work reviews. The commenter indicated that the language in
Sec. 411.160(b) would confuse beneficiaries and would not allay
beneficiary fears about continuing disability reviews (CDRs) because
SSA uses the term continuing disability reviews in the context of the
disability programs when referring to the process of conducting both
medical and work reviews. The commenter suggested that we establish a
different process for work reviews.
Response: We did not establish a different process for work reviews
because programmatically they are a type of CDR. However, in response
to this comment, we clarified the language in final Sec. 411.160(b).
The revised language references our rules on when we may conduct a CDR
(i.e. 20 CFR 404.1589, 416.989, and 416.989a) to determine whether an
individual remains eligible for disability-based benefits. It then
explains that, for purposes of subpart C, the term continuing
disability review includes the medical reviews we conduct when
determining if a beneficiary's medical condition has improved, as
described in 20 CFR 404.1594 and 416.994, but does not include the CDRs
we do under 20 CFR 404.1594(d)(5) to determine whether a title II
beneficiary's work activity demonstrates the ability to engage in SGA.
In light of this clarification, we removed the parenthetical reference
to Secs. 404.1594 and 416.994 that we included in proposed
Sec. 411.165.
Section 411.165 How Does Being in the Ticket to Work Program Affect My
Continuing Disability Reviews?
Comment: Two commenters recommended that we clarify proposed
Sec. 411.165 by referencing the specific sections that explain when the
period of using a ticket begins (Sec. 411.170) and ends (Sec. 411.171).
Response: We concur with the recommendation and are adding these
cross-references to final Sec. 411.165.
Comment: Another commenter, referencing proposed Sec. 411.165,
expressed concern that if a beneficiary places his or her ticket into
inactive status (e.g. due to health reasons) we would be able to
consider the activities he or she engaged in while actively
participating in the Ticket to Work program when we conduct a
subsequent medical CDR. The commenter said that our consideration of
such activities would create a significant disincentive for
beneficiaries to participate in the Ticket to Work program and
recommended that we amend final Sec. 411.165 to assure beneficiaries
that we
[[Page 67390]]
would not consider these activities when we conduct subsequent medical
CDRs.
Response: Section 1148 of the Act does not specifically address the
factors we consider when we conduct medical CDRs and thus we are not
amending Sec. 411.165 in the final rules in the manner suggested.
However, we will address this issue when we implement section 111 of
Public Law 106-170, Work Activity Standard as a Basis for Review of an
Individual's Disabled Status, which becomes effective on January 1,
2002. In general, this section amends section 221 of the Act to provide
that, with regard to individuals who are entitled to title II benefits
based on disability, and have received these benefits for at least 24
months, we will not schedule a CDR solely as a result of work activity,
and we will not use work activity engaged in by the individual as
evidence that the individual is no longer disabled.
Comment: A commenter asked what happens to those beneficiaries who
are eligible to use a ticket, but are already working with a provider
who is not an EN. The commenter notes that these beneficiaries, unlike
those who are using a Ticket, have to undergo CDRs even though they may
already be making progress towards fuller employment.
Response: In order for CDRs to be suspended for an individual under
section 1148(i) of the Act, the beneficiary must be using a ticket as
defined by the Commissioner of Social Security. In the situation
described by the commenter, the beneficiary may wish to encourage his
or her current provider to become an EN.
Section 411.166 Glossary of Terms Used in This Subpart
Comment: Several comments suggested that we define the terms we use
in subpart C in a central location in order to assist with the clarity
and flow of the subpart.
Response: We agree and have added new Sec. 411.166 to provide a
glossary of key terms which we use in Subpart C. In new Sec. 411.166 we
explain the following eight terms:
active participation in your employment plan
extension period
inactive status
initial 24-month period
progress review
timely progress guidelines
12-month progress review period,
using a ticket
In the proposed rules we called the ``12-month progress review
period'' the ``12-month work review period'' and a ``progress review''
a ``work review.'' We renamed these concepts in these final rules to
distinguish these progress reviews from the ``work reviews'' we conduct
for title II beneficiaries, following the completion of their trial
work periods, to determine whether their work and earnings demonstrate
the ability to engage in SGA. When we do a work review under the title
II disability program, we make a determination about whether an
individual is no longer disabled because of work and earnings. When we
do a progress review under the rules in subpart C, we are simply
deciding whether a Ticket is ``in use'' so that we can determine
whether an individual is exempt from periodic medical reviews.
Section 411.171 When Does the Period of Using a Ticket End?
Comment: One commenter stated we should ensure that the events
cited in proposed Sec. 411.171(b) and (c), that would signify that the
period of using a ticket has ended, are not beyond the control of the
individual. Proposed Sec. 411.171(b), which is redesignated in the
final rules as Sec. 411.171(e), provides that, if a beneficiary has
assigned a ticket to a State VR agency which selects the cost
reimbursement payment system, the period of using a ticket will end
with the 60th month for which an outcome payment would have been made
had the State VR agency chosen to serve the beneficiary as an EN.
Proposed Sec. 411.171(c), which is redesignated in the final rules as
Sec. 411.171(b), provides that the period of using a ticket will end
the day before the effective date of a decision under Sec. 411.192
(which has been incorporated in final Sec. 411.190), Sec. 411.195,
Sec. 411.200 or Sec. 411.205 that an individual no longer is making
timely progress toward self-supporting employment.
Response: Section 1148(h)(4)(B) of the Act provides that we will
make up to 60 outcome payments to an EN based on a ticket. Final
Sec. 411.171 (d) and (e), therefore, provide that the period of using a
ticket will terminate at the same point, with reference to potential
outcome payment months, regardless of whether a State VR agency elects
to serve a beneficiary as an EN or elects to be paid under the cost
reimbursement payment system. In order for the period of using a ticket
to terminate in this situation, a beneficiary will have had to work 60
months with monthly earnings sufficient to preclude the payment of
Social Security disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits.
The rules described in Secs. 411.190, 411.195, 411.200 and 411.205
contemplate that the beneficiary will have the opportunity to
participate in the decision-making process before the PM or SSA makes a
decision that the beneficiary is no longer making timely progress
toward self-supporting employment.
Comment: One commenter recommended that we add a provision to the
section of the rules regarding when the period of using a ticket ends
to assure that the State VR agency will receive payment for services
furnished to a beneficiary when a beneficiary applies and seeks
services from the State VR agency after his or her period of using a
ticket has ended.
Response: The determination regarding ticket use affects whether a
CDR may be initiated with respect to a beneficiary. The conduct of a
CDR could affect payment to providers if the beneficiary's entitlement
to or eligibility for benefits is determined to have ended for reasons
other than work or earnings. The specific determination as to whether
the period of using a ticket has ended for a particular beneficiary is
not relevant to the determination of whether or not a State VR agency
can be paid under either the cost reimbursement payment system or its
elected EN payment option. Unless the restrictions on payment described
in Sec. 411.585 apply, we will pay the State VR agency if all
requirements for payment are met, even if the beneficiary's ticket is
not in use.
Section 411.175 What if I Assign My Ticket After a Continuing
Disability Review Has Begun?
Comment: We received two comments suggesting that we add a
statement to this section to indicate that, if a beneficiary chooses to
have benefits continued pending an appeal of a medical cessation
determination and does not prevail in the appeal, he or she may be
required to repay the benefits received during this period.
Response: While we understand the concern of the commenters, we did
not adopt the recommendation to add this statement to Sec. 411.175 in
these final regulations, since this section provides appropriate cross-
references to Secs. 404.1597a and 416.996, which provide this
statement.
Comment: Two commenters indicated that, since no other individuals
have CDRs conducted while they are receiving services with a ticket, we
should suspend CDRs when a beneficiary assigns the ticket after a CDR
has begun. The commenters suggested that allowing the individual to
continue to receive services and supports through an established EN
should be consistent with the legislative intent to help ensure
[[Page 67391]]
access and entry into improved work opportunities. They concluded that
SSA has more to gain in terms of positive outcomes by allowing
suspension of such reviews and having the person continue with their
individual work plan.
Response: Section 1148(i) of the Act precludes the initiation of a
CDR for a beneficiary who is using a ticket as defined by the
Commissioner. Section 411.175 deals with the situation where a CDR is
initiated before the beneficiary assigns and begins using the ticket.
Mere receipt of a ticket does not preclude the conduct of a CDR.
Further, Sec. 411.175 does not preclude the beneficiary from receiving
services if he or she assigns a ticket after a CDR has begun.
Section 411.180 What Is Timely Progress Toward Self-Supporting
Employment?
General: By far, the overwhelming number of comments received
relating to subpart C of the NPRM related to this section on timely
progress toward self-supporting employment and other sections which
specify the guidelines for timely progress. We have divided these
comments into five topic areas. These topic areas are:
(1) Allowing the individual and the EN or State VR agency to define
what timely progress is in the IWP/IPE;
(2) ``Banking'' of work performed in the initial 24-month period;
(3) Allowing enough time in the time frames for the completion of
college degrees and/or other post-secondary education;
(4) Allowing for consideration of relapses, setbacks, and episodes
of illness in setting time frames; and
(5) Miscellaneous, such as the complexity of the timely progress
guidelines and the contention that the timely progress guidelines are
more lenient than the EN payment rules.
1. Allowing the Individual and the EN or State VR Agency To Define What
Timely Progress Is in the IWP/IPE
Comment: We received a large number of specific comments from
various individuals and organizations recommending that we allow the
individual and the EN or State VR agency to define what timely progress
is in the beneficiary's IWP or IPE. In general, these commenters stated
that people with disabilities have unique needs and, consequently, that
the measurement of timely progress should be flexible and
individualized.
Response: There appears to have been some misunderstanding that
beneficiaries must meet the timely progress guidelines in order to
participate in the Ticket to Work program. Therefore, we believe that
it is appropriate to restate here that the timely progress guidelines
are only used to determine whether a beneficiary is using a ticket for
purposes of protection against initiation of a CDR as provided under
section 1148(i) of the Act. Beneficiaries who do not meet the timely
progress guidelines may still participate in the Ticket to Work
program, receive services and generate outcome and milestone payments
to ENs. However, these beneficiaries may be subject to CDRs.
With reference to the specific recommendation, we appreciate that
individuals with disabilities have unique needs, and we believe that
there is sufficient flexibility in our timely progress rules to
accommodate these needs. Further, if we allowed the individual and the
EN or State VR agency to define timely progress, it would not be
possible to develop a consistent and standardized method to determine
timely progress for program administration and integrity purposes.
Absent these consistent standards, our ability to measure the
effectiveness of the Ticket to Work program would be significantly
hampered.
2. ``Banking'' of Work in the Initial 24-Month Period
Comment: There were a large number of commenters who recommended
improving the timely progress guidelines by providing for ``banking''
months of work completed in the initial 24-month period. These
commenters noted that many beneficiaries have disabilities that are
episodic and intermittent. While some people may not be able to work
right away, others might be able to work sooner but may experience
difficulties later. The commenters considered that it would be more
equitable if we allowed those who can work earlier than the time frames
described in the proposed rules to receive credit for their work
effort.
These commenters recommended that a beneficiary should be allowed
to ``bank'' work months in the first two years of a beneficiary's
participation in the program to count towards the work requirements in
later years. They further recommended that, in year 5 and beyond, work
in excess of the six-month requirement should count toward the next
year's work requirements. Finally, these commenters recommended that
increasing amounts of work or earnings, even if below SGA, should be
evaluated as meeting the requirements for progress reviews.
Response: As a result of these recommendations, we are modifying
Sec. 411.180 and other appropriate sections to allow a beneficiary who
has worked in months during the initial 24-month period to use those
months of work to meet the work requirements of the first 12-month
progress review period if the work was at the requisite level. However,
we did not adopt the recommendations to allow for ``banking'' of work
to satisfy the requirements of progress review periods beyond the first
12-month progress review period, or to consider increasing amounts of
work or earnings that are below the SGA level for non-blind
beneficiaries as meeting the requirements for progress reviews. These
recommendations would be inconsistent with the intent of the timely
progress guidelines, which is to require that beneficiaries demonstrate
an increasing ability to work at levels which will reduce their
dependence on cash benefits.
3. Allowing Enough Time in the Time Frames for the Completion of
College Degrees and/or Other Post-Secondary Education
Comment: We received a large number of comments that indicated that
the timely progress guidelines we proposed do not allow enough time for
an individual to prepare for employment by pursuing a college degree
and/or post-secondary education.
Response: We understand the concerns of the commenters and agree
that a college degree and/or post-secondary education may enhance
employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities. We anticipate
that the provision we are adding in response to recommendations to
allow for ``banking'' months of work will provide many beneficiaries
with additional time for the pursuit of college and/or post-secondary
education, while suspending CDRs for them. Further, as we have stated,
the timely progress guidelines are only intended to determine whether a
beneficiary will be considered to be using a ticket for purposes of
suspending initiation of CDRs. Therefore, a beneficiary pursuing post-
secondary education can continue to participate in the Ticket to Work
program, receive services and remain in the education program. However,
if the beneficiary does not meet the timely progress guidelines, he or
she would be subject to CDRs.
[[Page 67392]]
4. Allowing for Consideration of Relapses, Setbacks and Episodes of
Illness in Setting Time Frames
Comment: We received a substantial number of comments stating that
the proposed timely progress guidelines would not allow for relapses,
setbacks and episodes of illness.
Response: We have built into the timely progress guidelines several
mechanisms that will allow for the episodic nature of many impairments.
These mechanisms include the provision allowing a beneficiary to place
a ticket in inactive status during the initial 24-month period; the
progressive nature of the work requirements; the fact that we do not
require that work activity has to be continuous to satisfy the timely
progress guidelines, even in the fifth and subsequent years; and the
modification that we are making in the final regulation to allow a
beneficiary who has worked in months during the initial 24-month period
to use those months to meet the requirements of the first 12-month
progress review if the work was at the requisite level. Further, as we
have stated, these guidelines are only used to determine whether a
beneficiary will be considered to be using a ticket for purposes of
suspension of initiation of CDRs, not to determine whether the
beneficiary can participate in the Ticket to Work program.
5. Miscellaneous Comments
Comment: We received several comments from Federal and State VR
agencies indicating that the active participation requirement during
the initial 24-month period should be eliminated because it is not
consistent with principles set forth in title I of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), which governs the
Federal/State VR program. The commenters noted that, in contrast with
our proposed requirements, the Rehabilitation Act does not set a time
period for achieving an employment outcome as long as the terms of the
IPE are being met.
Response: The Ticket to Work program under section 1148 of the Act
is not intended to mirror the Federal/State program for rehabilitation
services under title I of the Rehabilitation Act. Rather, the purpose
of the Ticket to Work Program is to provide Social Security or SSI
beneficiaries who are disabled or blind the opportunity to choose from
a variety of providers to obtain the services and supports that they
need to become self-supporting. As we have stated, the timely progress
guidelines are only used to determine whether a beneficiary will be
considered to be using a ticket for purposes of suspending initiation
of CDRs. They are not designed to measure overall success of the
program or a beneficiary's ability to participate in the program. In
this context, we must establish consistent standards that would apply
to both beneficiaries receiving services from ENs and to beneficiaries
receiving services from State VR agencies.
Comment: One commenter remarked that the timely progress guidelines
that we proposed in Sec. 411.180 and in succeeding sections were more
generous than the payment requirements that we proposed in subpart H of
these rules. The commenter noted that a beneficiary could keep the CDR
protection afforded by the ticket by working for as little as nine
months at the SGA level over a four-year period, while an EN working
with such a beneficiary may receive only nine payments. The commenter
said such a funding scheme was unrealistic for those providers who do
not have additional funding sources.
Response: The timely progress guidelines and the rules governing
milestone and outcome payments are not designed for the same purpose.
As we have stated, the timely progress guidelines only are used to
determine whether a beneficiary will be considered to be using a ticket
for purposes of the protection against initiation of a CDR as provided
in section 1148(i) of the Act. The rules for determining if an EN or
State VR agency will be eligible to receive a payment under the EN
payment systems under the Ticket to Work program measure the ability of
the service provider to assist beneficiaries in their efforts to become
self-supporting. See subpart H for a further discussion of the EN
payment systems.
Comment: Several commenters remarked that there appears to be no
incentive for either an EN or a State VR agency to maintain a case open
in the initial 24-month period because the regulations do not provide
any financial payment for providing services to an individual in this
status. These commenters predicted that if we do not change our
regulations that ENs and State VR agencies will not serve beneficiaries
with significant disabilities or will be quick to terminate individuals
who do not make progress towards achieving SGA.
Response: The Ticket to Work program is an outcome-based program,
and provides for milestone payments when a beneficiary starts to work,
and/or outcome payments when Federal disability benefits are not
payable to a beneficiary due to work or earnings. While there is no
requirement that a beneficiary work during the initial 24-month period
in order to be making timely progress, there is no penalty for or
prohibition against work. In fact, we have modified the timely progress
rules to specifically respond to comments that some beneficiaries can
and do work early in their period of rehabilitation. In addition,
enhancements to the outcome-milestone payment system described in
subpart H of these rules make it possible for an EN to receive a
milestone payment if a beneficiary works for only one month and has
gross earnings from employment (or net earnings from self-employment)
for that month that are more than the SGA threshold amount. Therefore,
payment to ENs is possible during the initial 24-month period if they
serve beneficiaries who work during this period.
Comment: We received three related questions about proposed
Secs. 411.185 and 411.190. They were: (a) What will happen to
beneficiaries whose disabilities incapacitate them to the point that
they remain on the disability benefit rolls after fully utilizing the
ticket? (b) How much time does a consumer have to keep the ticket in
inactive status? and (c) Will the beneficiary have a penalty?
Response: We will make outcome payments to ENs to which
beneficiaries have assigned a ticket only if monthly cash benefits are
not payable because of the performance of SGA or by reason of earnings
from work. Generally, by the time 60 outcome payment months have
occurred, entitlement to title II benefits based on disability or
eligibility for title XVI benefits based on disability or blindness
will have terminated because of work or earnings for most
beneficiaries. However, these beneficiaries may be entitled to have
their benefits reinstated under section 223(i) or section 1631(p) of
the Act. As we explain in Sec. 411.125 of the final rules,
beneficiaries whose entitlement to or eligibility for benefits is
reinstated under these sections of the Act would be eligible to receive
another ticket if they meet certain other requirements for eligibility
for a ticket.
The option of placing a ticket in inactive status is available to
beneficiaries only during the initial 24-month period following the
assignment of the ticket. During this period there is no penalty or
time limit for keeping the ticket in inactive status, per se. What
happens is that the clock stops and the ensuing months during which the
ticket is in inactive status do not count towards the initial 24-month
period. However, the ticket is considered to be
[[Page 67393]]
not in use and the beneficiary is subject to continuing disability
reviews during this time.
Section 411.185 How Much Do I Need To Earn To Be Considered To Be
Working?
Comment: One commenter questioned whether the earnings guidelines
we proposed in Sec. 411.185(a)(1) and (b)(1) for meeting the timely
progress requirements during the first and second 12-month work reviews
would lessen the effect of existing work incentive provisions.
Response: The earnings guidelines we proposed only deal with
determining whether a beneficiary meets timely progress requirements
for purposes of suspending medical CDRs. The guidelines do not affect
any of the existing work incentive provisions.
Section 411.190 How is it Determined if I am Meeting the Timely
Progress Guidelines?
Comment: One commenter was concerned that proposed Sec. 411.190 may
conflict with other Federal regulations governing a State VR agency's
use and release of confidential information (see 34 CFR 361.38). This
commenter suggested that we modify our final rule by adding a new
paragraph that would require a State VR agency or an EN to satisfy all
applicable Federal and State confidentiality requirements before
sharing any personal information about the beneficiary with the PM.
Response: We do not believe that such a modification is necessary.
Nothing in this rule overrides Federal and State confidentiality rules.
We provide in 20 CFR Part 401 a description of SSA's policies and
procedures related to the Privacy Act of 1974, and section 1106 of the
Social Security Act concerning disclosure of information about
individuals. ENs, as SSA's contractors, are subject to these rules.
Similarly, Sec. 411.375 states that State VR agencies are required to
provide VR services under a plan approved under title I of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), even
when functioning as an EN. This includes the confidentiality
requirement that a State VR agency must follow.
Section 411.191 Table Summarizing the Guidelines for Timely Progress
Toward Self-Supporting Employment
Comment: One commenter, referencing the table in proposed
Sec. 411.191, suggested that we have one SGA level for all
beneficiaries and that it be the one that currently applies to those
who are blind. The commenter said the higher level would support the
Ticket program's goal of transitioning beneficiaries from benefits to
self-sufficiency and would encourage more beneficiaries to participate
in the Ticket to Work program.
Response: We did not adopt this suggestion because the SGA level
for individuals who are not blind is not the subject of these rules.
The rules relating to the SGA levels for those who are not blind can be
found in 20 CFR 404.1574 and 416.974, and the rules relating to the SGA
levels for those who are blind can be found in 20 CFR 404.1584.
Section 411.192 What if My EN, the State VR Agency, or I Report That I
Am Not Actively Participating in My Employment Plan?
Comment: One commenter suggested that we add a third choice to the
two we proposed in Sec. 411.192(a) (Sec. 411.190(a)(1) in the final
regulations) for beneficiaries who are not actively participating in
their employment plans during the initial 24-month period. It would
allow them to reassign their tickets to a different EN.
Response: We did not adopt this suggestion because we state in
another section of these final rules that beneficiaries will have the
right to reassign their tickets to other ENs or to a State VR agency
(see Sec. 411.150(a)). Such reassignments can occur regardless of
whether the beneficiaries are making timely progress toward self-
supporting employment.
Section 411.195 How Will the PM Conduct My 24-Month ProgressReview?
Comment: One commenter stated that the timely progress reviews we
proposed in Sec. 411.195 did not take into consideration the fact that
beneficiaries may not be able to obtain or retain employment due to
circumstances beyond their control. Reasons cited included a downward
turn in the economy that increases competition for available jobs, an
employment goal that requires more than two years to obtain, and a lack
of transportation to look for jobs. This commenter indicated that it
was unfair to subject beneficiaries to medical CDRs if they fail to
obtain employment through no fault of their own.
Response: The timely progress review to which this commenter
referred is the 24-month progress review, which does not contain a
specific requirement for work within the first 24 months after the
beneficiary assigns a ticket. However, the 12-month progress reviews,
which come after the 24-month progress review, contain a work
requirement. We did not modify those requirements because we believe
that they are sufficiently generous and flexible enough to accommodate
individual needs. They do not require work in every month. They require
work in three months for the first 12-month progress review period and
in six months for subsequent 12-month progress review periods.
We believe these rules are consistent with the intent of the Ticket
to Work program, which is to allow beneficiaries to choose from a
variety of providers to obtain the services and supports that they need
to become self-supporting. While beneficiaries may be subject to a CDR
if they do not successfully complete the 12-month progress reviews, the
Ticket does not terminate and beneficiaries may later qualify for CDR
protection.
Comment: One commenter recommended rewording Sec. 411.195(a)(1) so
that it does not sound like work is not an expectation within the
initial 24-month period.
Response: We agree with the comment and have reworded Sec. 411.195
consistent with this recommendation.
Comment: We received one comment about Sec. 411.195(a)(3). The
commenter stated that the EN or State VR agencies, rather than the PM,
should determine if the beneficiary can reasonably be expected to reach
the goal of at least three months of work during the next 12-month work
review period. The commenter continued that if we do not make this
change, then this section should be deleted.
Response: We have not adopted this comment. Under the law, we had
to define what it means to be using a ticket for purposes of receiving
protection against initiation of a CDR. We have chosen to use clear
standards (active participation in the employment plan during the first
24 months, then months of work activity at a certain level during
succeeding 12-month periods). We believe it is better to have the PM,
who is charged with helping us to administer the program, use the
criteria we have established to help us determine whether a beneficiary
will be considered to be using a ticket for purposes of CDR protection.
We believe having a single entity perform these reviews will lead to
more fair and efficient administration of the program.
Section 411.200 How Will the PM Conduct My Annual Work Review?
Comment: We received six comments that questioned the ability of
the PM to accurately anticipate and assess timely progress for
individuals whose tickets are assigned to ENs or State VR agencies.
[[Page 67394]]
Response: We believe that we have developed clear standards for
determining whether a beneficiary is making timely progress toward
self-supporting employment for purposes of being considered to be using
a ticket. We further believe that it is better to have the PM, who is
charged with helping us to administer the program, use these criteria
to help us to determine whether a beneficiary is using a ticket for
purposes of CDR protection. We believe that having a single entity
perform these reviews, with significant input from ENs and State VR
agencies, will lead to more fair and efficient administration of the
program.
Section 411.210 What Happens if I Do Not Make Timely Progress Toward
Self-Supporting Employment?
Comment: Four commenters asked us to clarify the proposed rules in
Sec. 411.210(a) to indicate whether a State VR agency would be able to
receive payment under the cost-reimbursement payment system if a
beneficiary, who is found to be no longer using a ticket for CDR
protection purposes, continues to participate in the Ticket to Work
program. Also, another commenter asked us whether a State VR agency or
an EN would still be eligible for the payment option it selected should
the beneficiary work but not meet the requirements for re-entering in-
use status.
Response: In these final rules, we made changes to Sec. 411.210(a)
to indicate that a State VR agency which selects the cost reimbursement
payment system may be eligible for payment under that system even
though the beneficiary is determined to be no longer using a ticket. We
also made changes to indicate that an EN or State VR agency serving a
beneficiary as an EN may receive milestone or outcome payments for
which it is eligible even though the beneficiary is considered to be no
longer using a ticket. The proposed rules had referred only to outcome
payments. Under the final rules, beneficiaries who do not meet the
timely progress guidelines may continue to receive services from their
service providers.
Comment: One commenter was concerned that an EN that first serves a
beneficiary might not receive its appropriate share of any future EN
payments if a beneficiary puts a ticket in inactive status or switches
ENs when seeking to re-enter in-use status. This commenter recommended
that we amend proposed Sec. 411.210(b)(1)(ii) to provide that when a
beneficiary completes the required three months of work at the
requisite level for reinstatement, he/she may re-enter in-use status,
provided the ticket is reassigned to the previous EN or State VR
agency.
Response: We did not adopt this commenter's suggestion. We
initially note that under the situation described in this section, the
ticket does not have to be ``reassigned'' if it has never been taken
out of assignment. This section merely provides that for a beneficiary
to re-enter in-use status, his or her ticket must be assigned to an EN
or State VR agency. We further believe that we do not have authority
under section 1148 of the Act to restrict the beneficiary's choices
regarding assigning a ticket in the manner suggested. With regard to
this commenter's concerns about a former EN sharing in any future EN
payments, our rules in Sec. 411.560 allow us to allocate a payment to
more than one EN when the ENs request payment for the same milestone or
outcome and the beneficiary has assigned the ticket to them at
different times.
Comment: A comment referenced Sec. 411.210 and suggested adding a
new provision to the regulations to indicate that if SSA determined
that individuals were not using a ticket, and, after a CDR, determined
that they no longer were disabled, they still could continue to receive
benefits if they meet the requirements in section 225(b) of the Social
Security Act.
Response: We are not adopting this recommendation to add a section
to the Ticket to Work program regulations concerning the provisions for
continuation of benefits. The rules for continuation of benefit
payments to persons who recover medically while participating in a
rehabilitation program are in 20 CFR 404.316(c), 404.337(c),
404.352(d), and 416.1338. As previously stated, we plan to publish
proposed rules to amend those sections of the regulations to take
account of the amendments made by section 101(b) of Public Law 106-170
to sections 225(b) and 1631(a)(6) of the Act.
Comment: This commenter also indicated that Sec. 411.210(b)(1)(i)
should be revised to make the requirement for re-entering in-use status
during the initial 24-month period or in the 24-month progress review
consistent with the actual requirements for this phase, in other words,
actively participating in the activities outlined in the IWP/IPE,
rather than completing three months of work at the prescribed level.
The commenter indicated that this provision is not consistent with the
purpose, as explained in the preamble and the proposed rules
themselves, for the first 24-month period. The commenter further
recommended that the requirements for reinstatement after subsequent
work reviews also should be consistent with the requirements of that
phase of timely progress.
Response: We have revised the requirements for re-entering in-use
status during the initial 24-month period in Sec. 411.210(b)(1). We
have not changed the requirements for re-entering in-use status after
failing to meet the timely progress guidelines in the 24-month progress
review or in the 12-month progress reviews because these requirements
are consistent with the requirements of the reviews.
Section 411.220 What if I Am Temporarily Unable To Participate in My
Employment Plan?
Comment: We received five comments about proposed Sec. 411.220(a).
All of these comments indicated that we should allow use of the
``inactive status'' (as defined in proposed Secs. 411.192(b) and
Sec. 411.220(a)) not only in the initial 24-month period, but
throughout the life of the ticket as long as the ticket is in use.
Response: To improve the organization of the rules in subpart C,
the rules that were set out in proposed Secs. 411.192 and 411.220 have
been incorporated in Sec. 411.190 in the final regulations. We did not
adopt the suggestion to expand the scope of the rules to allow the
placement of a ticket in inactive status after, as well as during, the
initial 24-month period. While the placement of a ticket in inactive
status is only permitted during the initial 24-month period in these
final rules, the work requirements in subsequent progress review
periods are designed to allow for intermittent employment (that is,
three months of work out of 12, or six months of work out of 12) and to
take into account relapses in health.
Comment: We received a comment regarding proposed
Sec. 411.220(b)(1) that indicated a belief that an individual would not
be eligible to receive services from an EN or State VR agency if the
individual chooses to place the ticket in inactive status. This
commenter indicated that State VR agencies must continue to provide
services to their clients under the terms of the IPE.
Response: Section 411.190 of these regulations indicates that the
option of placing a ticket in inactive status is designed to
accommodate individuals who temporarily are unable to participate or
are not actively participating in their employment plan. This presumes
that these individuals will not be receiving services under an IPE
during this period of inactivity.
[[Page 67395]]
Comment: We received a comment suggesting that we modify proposed
Sec. 411.220(d) to include reassignment of the ticket as one of the
options that the PM will offer a beneficiary who is not actively
participating in his or her employment plan. This option would be in
addition to the options of resuming active participation or placing the
ticket in inactive status.
Response: We are not making this change because the rules in
proposed Sec. 411.220(d), which have been moved to Sec. 411.190(a)(1)
in the final regulations, concern the timely progress guidelines. In
Secs. 411.145 and 411.150 of the final rules, we explain that a
beneficiary has the option of taking a ticket out of assignment and
then reassigning the ticket. We will ensure that beneficiaries are
advised of their options regarding ticket reassignment by providing
public information materials, notices, operating instructions and
procedures to the PM.
Section 411.225 What if My Ticket Is No Longer Assigned to an EN or
State VR Agency?
Comment: We received two comments about this section (which is
Sec. 411.220 in the final regulations) which allows the individual an
extension period of up to three months, during which the individual
will be considered to be using a ticket even though the ticket is no
longer assigned, to give the individual time to find another EN willing
and able to serve the individual. One commenter expressed support for
the provision and did not recommend any changes. The other commenter
suggested adding a numbered paragraph to Sec. 411.225(a) as follows:
``You have relocated to an area not served by your previous EN or State
VR agency.''
Response: We agree with the suggested change to this section, with
a modification. We are adding language to Sec. 411.220(a)(1) of the
final rules (formerly proposed Sec. 411.225(a)(1)), instead of adding
another numbered paragraph, to indicate that a beneficiary may have
retrieved the ticket because the beneficiary relocated to an area not
served by the beneficiary's previous EN or State VR agency.
Subpart D--Use of One or More Program Managers To Assist in
Administration of the Ticket to Work Program
Section 411.230 What Is a PM?
Comments: The comments on proposed Sec. 411.230 generally
questioned the ability of a PM to administer a program as large and
complex as the Ticket to Work program. One of the commenters expressed
concern about the selection of a private organization as PM and
recommended that the program be administered only by a designated State
agency. The commenter indicated that there is a proven history of State
administration of Federal programs to support their recommendation.
Other issues included the PM's ability to provide sufficient access for
beneficiaries with disabilities, to deal with the diversity issues of
persons with disabilities, and to coordinate the program equitably
nationwide.
Response: Section 1148(d)(1) of Public Law 106-170 specifically
provides that PM(s) can be either private or public sector
organizations. Therefore, the selection of the PM cannot be restricted
to only State agencies as recommended in the comments. All
organizations, both public and private, must be considered under the
competitive bidding process as stated in Sec. 411.230. The Commissioner
may terminate a PM for inadequate performance. Public and private
entities that serve as a PM for us will be held to the same level of
accountability.
While the regulation provides general information about the PM's
administration of the Ticket to Work program, specific details
regarding program administration are provided in the PM contract. The
contract contains a comprehensive business plan, a listing of specific
tasks required of the PM, and a delivery schedule for completion of the
required tasks. We believe that the questions raised about access and
diversity are sufficiently addressed in the contract. For example, the
Business Plan in the contract requires the PM to operate a toll-free
Text Telephone Communication Service and provide Spanish language
services. Further, the Business Plan designates the hours of service to
be provided across the country and requires that inquiries be monitored
on a State-by-State basis to ensure that the program is successfully
implemented nationwide.
In September 2000, we contracted with MAXIMUS, Inc., to serve as
the PM for the Ticket to Work program. Specific information about their
duties and responsibilities as the PM can be obtained through their
toll-free number at 1-866-968-7842, or TTY 1-866-833-2967.
Section 411.245 What Are the PM's Responsibilities Under the Ticket to
Work Program?
Comment: The majority of comments on proposed subpart D of the
regulation addressed the provisions of Sec. 411.245. Several of the
comments on proposed Sec. 411.245(a) questioned the PM's ability to
recruit sufficient numbers of ENs. Specifically, the commenters
expressed concern about whether enough ENs would be recruited in all
States and all areas to provide beneficiaries with EN choices. To
address this issue, one commenter recommended that a formal referral
process be created for the beneficiaries to refer service providers to
the PM as potential ENs. Another commenter wanted the evaluation of the
PM as described in proposed Sec. 411.250 to specifically identify ``the
recruitment of sufficient ENs'' as one of the assessment criteria.
Another comment addressed the issue of beneficiary options from a
different perspective. The commenter recommended that the PM provide
each EN with a list of ticket holders in their area that had not yet
assigned their ticket. Each EN could then contact the beneficiaries and
discuss with them services the EN could offer. Through this process,
beneficiaries would be provided a variety of options from which to
choose when assigning their ticket.
Response: As we indicated previously, the regulation provides
general information regarding the responsibilities of the PM. The PM
contract gives much greater detail about the PM's responsibilities,
including the marketing activities that the PM will undertake.
While the contract does not specifically identify a referral
program for beneficiaries as part of their recruitment efforts, it does
require the PM to use a variety of resources in their recruitment
efforts. Since neither the regulation nor the PM contract precludes the
beneficiary as a source for potential EN referrals, we do not believe a
formal referral process specifically for beneficiaries is needed in
order for the PM to use this source when appropriate. We do not believe
that it is necessary to identify ``recruitment of sufficient ENs'' as a
separate assessment criterion in the regulation. The regulation
provides assessment criteria such as quality of services and customer
satisfaction. We believe that these criteria can be used in determining
whether or not the PM recruited sufficient ENs to provide beneficiaries
with choices in the assignment of their tickets. In addition to the
assessment criteria listed in the regulations, the PM's contract
identifies the enrollment of sufficient ENs as a performance standard
required under the Government Performance and Results Act.
The process for the PM to provide ENs with information about
beneficiaries eligible to receive tickets is
[[Page 67396]]
addressed in the Business Plan of the PM's contract. We will provide
the PM with a list of all ticket-eligible beneficiaries by geographic
area and disability impairment. The PM will provide, within the
limitations of the Privacy Act, the ENs with information from this list
for beneficiaries eligible to receive tickets in their area. The PM
will encourage the ENs to use the lists to market their services with
the beneficiaries.
Comment: Several comments on proposed Sec. 411.245(b) addressed the
issue of providing information in accessible formats. The language in
the proposed regulation defined accessible format as ``media that is
appropriate to a particular beneficiary's medical impairment(s)''.
Other commenters were concerned that all information about the Ticket
to Work program should be provided in an accessible format and that the
beneficiary's preference should be taken into consideration. One
commenter requested that ``medical'' be removed from the term ``medical
impairment,'' in defining ``accessible format'' in paragraph (b)(2).
Response: The Business Plan of the PM contract identifies certain
requirements that address accessibility issues. The PM is required to
operate a toll-free Text Telephone Communication Service for people
with hearing and speech impairments+ to provide service through their
toll-free telephone number. In addition, the website operated by the PM
will be fully accessible to visitors with disabilities via software-
based assistive technologies such as screen readers, screen magnifiers,
speech synthesizers, and voice input software that operate in
conjunction with graphical desktop browsers. Informational materials
will be made available to beneficiaries in Braille format upon request.
We agree with the comment regarding the word ``medical,'' as not all
impairments are ``medical'' in nature. We have changed the language in
the final regulations to omit the word ``medical''.
Comment: Comments on proposed Sec. 411.245(b) and (d) recommended
adding time frames to the regulation. One was a fifteen-day time frame
for the PM to respond to the beneficiaries about the reassignment of
their tickets. The second was a ten-day time frame for the PM to
respond to the EN about the assignment of a beneficiary's ticket. In
both instances, the commenters were concerned about the delays that
beneficiaries and ENs might experience if the PM did not respond
timely.
Response: In both of the situations addressed in the comments,
there is an assumption that services to the beneficiary cannot begin
until a formal notice is received from the PM about the assignment or
reassignment of a Ticket. This is not the case. The Business Plan of
the PM contract outlines the process the PM will use for assigning or
reassigning a ticket. When a beneficiary brings the Ticket to an EN,
the EN will verify that the beneficiary has a ticket eligible for
assignment. If the beneficiary and EN agree to work together, they
develop an individual work plan. At this time, the beneficiary and the
EN may begin working together. Therefore, there is no delay in service
as anticipated by the comments. When the PM receives the plan signed by
both the beneficiary and EN, the PM will verify that the ticket is
eligible for assignment, update the database to show the ticket has
been assigned, and notify the appropriate parties.
Comment: Comments on proposed Sec. 411.245(c)(2) and
Sec. 411.245(d) requested that additional language be included to
clarify the PM's involvement in certain dispute resolution situations.
Commenters wanted both sections to identify the PM's responsibility to
resolve payment disputes between two or more ENs when a ticket is re-
assigned and multiple ENs have provided services to the same
beneficiary.
Response: We agree and we are revising Sec. 411.245(c)(2) to
clarify that the PM will be responsible for making determinations
regarding the allocation of outcome or milestone payments when the
beneficiary has been served by more than one EN. We believe that the
changes to Sec. 411.245(c)(2) address the commenter's concerns and
additional changes in Sec. 411.245(d) are not needed.
Comment: We received several comments on proposed Sec. 411.245(d)
from State VR agencies regarding the PM's review of individual work
plans and individualized plans for employment. The commenters wanted
the regulation to clarify that the PM could review only individual work
plans and not individualized plans for employment. They stressed that
the PM had no authority to review an individualized plan for employment
submitted by a State VR agency serving as an EN. The comments cited 34
CFR 361.45 and 361.46 as the only authority for the content and the
development of individualized plans for employment.
Response: Section 411.245(d) of the regulation does not require the
PM to review individualized plans for employment or amendments to those
plans. We have revised this section, as recommended, to state that the
PM will not review individualized plans for employment developed by
beneficiaries and State VR agencies. Section 411.385 of the regulation
describes how an individualized plan for employment is used in the
Ticket to Work program. Section 411.385 does not require these plans to
be submitted to the PM in connection with the assignment of a ticket to
a State VR agency, and we did not intend for the PM to review
individualized plans for employment.
Comment: Several comments on proposed Sec. 411.245(d) discussed the
PM's oversight of referrals between the ENs and the State VR agencies.
Commenters requested additional language that would clarify the PM's
responsibility when an EN that chooses not to take a beneficiary's
ticket makes a referral to a State VR agency. The commenters wanted the
regulation to reflect the PM's lack of jurisdiction regarding such
referrals.
Response: While a referral to the State VR agency in this situation
is possible, the referral would be outside the parameters of the Ticket
to Work program and the PM's authority. So, we do not believe that we
need to clarify the PM's lack of authority to oversee such referrals.
Section 411.250 How Will SSA Evaluate a PM?
Comment: We received many comments about the evaluation process for
the PM. The commenters wanted to ensure that evaluation included input
from a variety of stakeholders. Several commenters recommended that we
solicit input from ENs and beneficiaries as part of the evaluation
process for the PM. In addition, one commenter urged that we submit the
evaluation to the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel for
comment and recommendations.
Response: The evaluation will gather input from parties served by
the PM including beneficiaries and ENs. We agree that such input is a
valuable resource. We also agree that it is appropriate for the Ticket
to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel to receive and review a copy
of the evaluation. However, we do not believe that these regulations
need to address this issue as the evaluation process is outlined in
detail in the PM's contract.
Comment: Other comments on proposed Sec. 411.250 were directed at
specific elements of the evaluation process. One commenter requested
that the regulation specify that an evaluation would be performed at
least annually. Another commenter wanted to know about the
qualifications of the Project Officer and the Contracting Officer to
review a contract for disability-related programs.
[[Page 67397]]
Response: We believe that these elements of the evaluation process
should not be addressed in this regulation as they are already
described in other Federal regulations including the Federal
Acquisition Regulations (FAR) at 48 CFR Chapter 1. The procedures
regarding the review of the PM's performance are spelled out in the FAR
at 48 CFR subpart 42.15. Qualifications for project officers and
contracting officers are established in the FAR at 48 CFR 1.102-4 and
1.602-1. In addition, the Project Officer is on staff at SSA's Office
of Employment Support Program and is knowledgeable about programs
serving persons with disabilities.
Subpart E--Employment Networks
Section 411.300 What is an EN?
Comment: Some commenters suggested that the definition of an EN
should be included in its entirety in the ``Definitions'' section of
the final rule. They indicated this definition should include a
complete list of the services that the ENs are responsible for
providing or arranging and noted that we should include the scope of
services that may be needed to enable an individual with a disability
to prepare for work. Some other commenters indicated that ENs should be
required to provide a minimum range of services and that we should
specify what is meant by ``substantial expertise and experience'' as
contained in section 1148(f)(1)(C) of the Act.
Response: We have defined employment network, or EN, at
Sec. 411.115(e). We are not providing a more complete listing of
services because such a listing would not encompass all the services or
other assistance a beneficiary might need. Instead we are specifying
only employment services, vocational rehabilitation services or other
support services to provide flexibility to ENs and thus not
specifically include or exclude some services. Section 411.245(b)(3)
contains examples of the services an EN may provide. The types of
services an EN will provide in a specific case will be detailed in the
work plan an EN will sign with a beneficiary. SSA does not want to
limit or describe what specific services should be included in this
plan. The phrase ``substantial expertise and experience'' is found in
section 1148(f)(1)(C) of the Act, which states that no EN ``may serve
under the Program unless it meets and maintains compliance with both
general selection criteria (such as professional and educational
qualifications, where applicable) and specific selection criteria (such
as substantial expertise and experience in providing relevant
employment services and supports).'' We have not further defined that
phrase in the regulations. The general and specific selection criteria
for ENs are contained in Sec. 411.315 of the final rules.
Section 411.305 Who Is Eligible To Be an EN?
Comment: Many commenters recommended that family or friends who
wish to serve an individual be considered eligible to be an EN. Some
commenters also suggested that we permit a beneficiary to be his or her
own EN.
Response: The law provides that any entity willing to assume
responsibility for the coordination and delivery of services under the
Ticket to Work program may qualify as an EN. Our regulation states that
any qualified entity willing to assume responsibility for the
coordination and delivery of employment services, VR services, or other
support services to beneficiaries who have assigned their tickets to an
EN are eligible to be ENs. This does not rule out family or friends who
meet the qualifications to be an EN and are willing to assume this
responsibility. We therefore do not see any need to specifically cite
family or friends. However, the statute does not allow a beneficiary to
serve as his or her own EN. As Sec. 1148(b)(3) of the Social Security
Act and Sec. 411.120 explain, a ticket under the Ticket to Work program
is a document which provides evidence of the Commissioner's agreement
to pay an EN or State VR agency for providing services to a
beneficiary.
Comment: Some commenters questioned why State VR and one-stop
delivery systems should be automatic ENs. Another commenter requested
inclusion of the Department of Veterans Affairs as an EN. Another
commenter wanted to know whether an employer could become an EN.
Response: Section 1148(f)(1) of the Act states that an EN may be an
agency or instrumentality of a State (or political subdivision thereof)
or a private entity. It does not allow Federal agencies to serve as
ENs. Section 1148(c) of the Act allows each State VR agency to elect to
participate in the Ticket to Work program as an EN with respect to a
disabled individual. While the law specifically cites one-stop delivery
systems as eligible to become ENs, it does not make them ENs
automatically. Section 411.305(g) lists employers as eligible to be
ENs.
Comment: One commenter wanted to know whether American Indian
Projects may become ENs and whether such projects can become ENs if
their State has not been chosen as a site.
Response: Section 411.305(e) lists organizations administering VR
Services Projects for American Indians with Disabilities authorized
under section 121 of part C of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), as one of the entities eligible to be
ENs. American Indian Projects under section 121 can apply to be ENs
only within the States where the Ticket to Work program has been
implemented, or if they are qualified to provide services within such a
State.
Section 411.310 How Does an Entity Apply To Be an EN and Who Will
Determine Whether an Entity Qualifies as an EN?
Comment: Some commenters wanted to know how an entity applies to be
an EN, who will determine whether an entity qualifies, and requested
that our final rule reflect the differences in application between
State VR agencies and other entities.
Response: Section 411.310 explains that an entity applies to be an
EN by responding to our Request for Proposal (RFP), that the PM will
conduct a preliminary review of responses to the RFP, and that the
Commissioner will decide which applicants will be approved to serve as
ENs. Sections 411.360 and 411.365 explain that we will notify the State
VR agency in writing about the payment systems available under the
Ticket to Work program, and that the State agency must respond in
writing. We have revised Sec. 411.310 to clarify that this section
applies to entities other than State VR agencies which are applying to
be ENs.
Comment: One commenter suggested that since the PM is charged with
the responsibility to ensure that there are a sufficient number of ENs
nationally, the PM should be charged with the responsibility to
evaluate the qualifications because they are more qualified. The
commenter also stated that the PM, not the Commissioner, should decide
which applicants to select as ENs.
Response: The PM will play a strong role in evaluating applicants'
qualifications and in recommending applicants for selection as ENs. SSA
will consider the PM's evaluations and recommendations. However, since
SSA will be entering into agreements with ENs, will be making payments
to ENs, and ultimately will be responsible for the success of the
Ticket to Work program, SSA must remain the final authority for
evaluating EN
[[Page 67398]]
qualifications and determining which applicants will become ENs.
Comment: Several commenters suggested that we change Sec. 411.310
to indicate that it applies to entities other than State VR agencies
and that State VR agencies must comply with Sec. 411.360 which
discusses how a State VR agency becomes an EN.
Response: We have modified Sec. 411.310 to indicate that it applies
to entities other than State VR agencies and added a part (c) to
explain that Sec. 411.360 describes how State VR agencies participate
as ENs in the Ticket to Work program.
Section 411.315 What Are the Minimum Qualifications Necessary To Be an
EN?
Comment: One commenter suggested switching the order of some of the
qualifications listed in Sec. 411.315(a) and deleting the example in
Sec. 411.315 of using staff with a college degree in a related field.
Response: The order of qualifications listed in Sec. 411.315(a)
does not imply that the first one listed is of more importance than
subsequent qualifications. Items (1) through (6) in this listing are of
equal weight and there is no rationale for rearranging the listing. The
use of staff with degrees in a related field as a qualification for ENs
ensures that we do not unduly restrict qualified entities from becoming
ENs and thus limit the options of our beneficiaries seeking services,
because it provides another way for an entity to demonstrate that it
meets one of the qualifications to serve as an EN.
Comment: Several commenters believed that our requirements for ENs
should require all ENs to be licensed, certified, accredited or
registered to provide services or to be able to arrange for other
qualified entities to provide these services. Other commenters felt
that our requirements were too stringent and that we should delete
entirely Sec. 411.315(c), which requires that potential ENs have
applicable licenses, or certificates if required by State law.
Response: We have tried to strike a balance between ensuring that
ENs are qualified by licensing or certification, while also providing
an opportunity for non-traditional providers to qualify as ENs by
demonstrating that they have obtained education or experience in
providing the relevant services. Section 1148(f) of the Act provides
that ENs must meet general selection criteria such as professional and
educational qualifications where applicable and specific selection
criteria such as substantial expertise and experience in providing
relevant employment services and supports. Section 1148(f) did not
limit us to requiring that all ENs be licensed, certified, or
accredited, or registered to provide services or to arrange for other
qualified entities to provide these services. However, where State law
requires such documentation, the requirements of State law will apply.
Comment: Many commenters noted that the proposed rules appeared to
require that ENs have relevant certification, accreditation, or
license, even when the EN is not directly involved in the provision of
services. They specifically expressed concern that we were requiring
ENs to be qualified to provide medical and health-related services.
Commenters suggested that our final rule clarify that an EN would not
need certification, accreditation, or licensing unless it was directly
providing the relevant services, but that the EN must be able to
arrange for an entity with the applicable certification, accreditation,
or license to provide the services.
Response: Section 411.315 of the proposed rules did not require
certification, licensing or registration per se. Section 411.315(b) of
the rules requires ENs to have qualified staff. One way to meet this
requirement is by using staff that are properly credentialed. Section
411.315(c) of the rules requires ENs to comply with whatever State laws
may apply to them; ENs are not relieved of their obligation to comply
with State law simply by virtue of participating in the Ticket to Work
program. Based on the comments, we revised Sec. 411.315(b)(2) to
clarify that if any medical and related health services are provided,
the EN should take reasonable steps to assure that such services are
provided under the formal supervision of persons licensed to prescribe
or supervise the provision of such services. We did not intend to give
the impression in the proposed rules that all ENs must be licensed to
provide medical services.
Comment: A few commenters noted that required certificates and
licenses would vary on a State-to-State basis and asked what measures
would be taken to address the quality assurance of State requirements.
Response: SSA has no authority or interest in determining the
validity of State licensing requirements or to encroach on State laws
regarding these requirements. Section 411.315(c) states that potential
ENs must comply with other laws that they may be subject to in order to
provide employment services, vocational rehabilitation services, and
other support services. Their potential participation in the Ticket to
Work program does not eliminate their duty to comply with other State
laws that may govern their activities.
Comment: One commenter suggested that our qualifications for ENs
should include alternative demonstrations of competency and allow for
special circumstances under which an individual can choose as their
provider an entity with no demonstrated qualifications or experience
subject to individual approval and periodic review of progress by the
PM. Some commenters indicated that to meet the goal of expanding the
universe of service providers, we should include those family members,
friends, or other persons who have the greatest personal investment in
the individual's self-sufficiency including formally established
circles of support or incorporated trust/guardianship boards and to
allow for our experience requirement to include experience in life
planning and community support.
Response: Section 1148(f)(1) of the Act requires that ENs meet and
maintain compliance with both general selection criteria (such as
professional and educational qualifications) and specific selection
criteria (such as substantial expertise and experience in providing
relevant employment services and supports). The Act thus requires some
level of education, experience, or expertise in providing employment
related services and does not permit us to use, as an EN, providers
with no demonstrated qualifications or experience in providing or
arranging for these types of services. Friends, family members, or
other persons must meet these requirements to qualify as ENs.
Comment: Several commenters questioned whether our requirement of
applicable licenses, if such licenses are required by State law, would
prevent entities specializing in certain impairments, such as deafness
or blindness, from qualifying as ENs. Other commenters suggested our
licensing requirement is too restrictive and will prevent organizations
with national licenses or certifications from qualifying as ENs. Still
other commenters indicated that Sec. 411.315(a)(3) should be modified
to include nondiscrimination on the basis of disability as a
requirement to be an EN.
Response: We do not believe the requirement in Sec. 411.315(c) that
ENs follow State law will prevent ENs from specializing in certain
impairments. Section 411.315(c) merely provides that ENs must follow
the State laws that are applicable to them. SSA has no authority to
encroach on State laws in instances where licenses, certification,
[[Page 67399]]
or accreditation are required to provide specific services, including
licenses to serve deaf or hard of hearing individuals. We do not
believe the requirement in Sec. 411.315(c) will prevent organizations
with national licenses or certificates from qualifying as ENs.
Presumably, these organizations are already complying with State laws
applicable to them. We are not adopting the comment to modify
Sec. 411.315(a)(3) to require nondiscrimination on the basis of
disability. The RFP for ENs requires applicants to indicate the
impairment categories they serve and demonstrate that they have
experience and expertise in serving people within those impairment
categories. We envision that ENs will serve individuals in different
impairment categories and have expertise and experience in serving
specific groups.
Comment: Some commenters believed the proposed rule placed a higher
value on education than on experience. Other commenters questioned what
constitutes ``substantial expertise and experience.''
Response: The rules do not place a higher value on education than
on experience. Our requirements to qualify as an EN are found at
Sec. 411.315. They include general criteria such as systems
requirements, being accessible, and having adequate resources to
perform the required activities, among other items. They also include
specific criteria. The phrase ``substantial expertise and experience''
is used in section 1148(f)(1)(C) of the Act as an example of what may
be used as specific selection criteria to be an EN. With respect to the
specific selection criteria we use in Sec. 411.315(b), we require ENs
to have qualified staff. Potential ENs may show they have qualified
staff by demonstrating that their staff are certified, licensed or meet
certain standards. Potential ENs may also show they have qualified
staff by demonstrating that their staff have education or experience to
provide the services that the EN wants to provide to beneficiaries.
Comment: One commenter suggested that we require all ENs to develop
an expertise in small business development and self-employment
assistance services. The commenter stated that access to competent and
available self-employment and small business development services are
critical to successful employment outcomes.
Response: Expertise in small business development and self-
employment assistance could be a valuable tool for ENs in providing
services to beneficiaries. However, we do not believe we should require
all ENs to have this expertise. We intend these rules to encourage a
variety of entities with different skills and expertise to become ENs,
and do not want to limit a beneficiary's range of choices by requiring
that all ENs possess a specific expertise.
Comment: One commenter suggested that SSA implement a vigorous
review process for any entity that wishes to become an EN to assure
that each approved EN is adequately staffed by educated and certified
professionals who are experienced in the areas of rehabilitation and
disability. Other commenters indicated that we failed in the proposed
rules to require specific qualifications for EN staff that would ensure
a high level of knowledge in serving many disabilities.
Response: The RFP for ENs requires that entities submit
documentation of their qualifications to serve as ENs. SSA will not
enter into agreements with entities that do not meet this requirement.
Further, Sec. 411.315 provides criteria that an entity must meet to
qualify as an EN. The staffing requirements outlined in this section
should ensure that ENs have staff with a high level of knowledge to
serve our beneficiaries. An EN is not required to serve all disability
categories but can specialize. The RFP asks applicants to indicate the
impairment categories they serve and demonstrate their qualifications
to serve people within those impairment categories.
Comment: Some commenters stated that we should specify the range of
services ENs must provide.
Response: We want to encourage as many qualified entities as
possible to serve as ENs. We do not believe we should require all ENs
to provide the same set of particular services, as beneficiaries may
find a wide variety of services helpful in their return to work
efforts. In addition, some ENs may not necessarily provide certain
services, but only coordinate the delivery of services.
Comment: One commenter requested we permit providers who qualified
as alternate participants under our reimbursement program to be
automatically eligible as ENs. The commenter also suggested that other
entities which already contract with State VR agencies should readily
qualify as ENs.
Response: With respect to alternate participants, in any State
where the Ticket to Work program is implemented, each alternate
participant whose service area is in that State will be asked if it
wants to participate in the program as an EN. See section 1148(d)(4)(B)
of the Social Security Act and Sec. 411.705 of these final rules. With
respect to entities that have contracts with State VR agencies, section
1148(f)(1) of the Act requires that all entities must meet and maintain
compliance with both general and specific selection criteria. Entities
which have already contracted with State VR agencies are required to
submit proposals in response to our RFP and indicate that they will
comply with all requirements of the Ticket to Work program.
Comment: One commenter recommended that we presumptively deem one-
stop delivery systems established under title I of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 as meeting the qualifications to be an EN.
Another commenter asked whether an independent living center might
qualify as an EN. Another asked what policies would be put in place for
people such as artists whose work does not fall into a category
represented by an EN. This commenter expressed a concern that SSA did
not see the arts as a valid career choice.
Response: Section 1148(f) of the Act does not permit us to
presumptively deem any entity as qualified as an EN, although State VR
agencies and alternate participants are the only entities that do not
have to follow the standard application process to become an EN. All
other potential ENs must respond to the RFP for ENs and indicate that
they understand and meet the requirements to serve as ENs. An
independent living center may qualify as an EN if it meets the
requirements spelled out in these regulations and in the RFP for ENs.
Our regulation does not state what is appropriate work or prohibit
potential ENs from specializing in certain career fieldsComment:
Section 411.315(a)(2) of the proposed rules states that the general
criteria for EN qualification include ``being accessible, both
physically and programmatically, to beneficiaries seeking or receiving
services.'' Some commenters suggested that we need to define
``programmatic accessibility.''
Response: We agree and have revised Sec. 411.315(a)(2) in the final
rules to include some examples of what it means to be programmatically
accessible.
Section 411.320 What Are an EN's Responsibilities as a Participant in
the Ticket to Work Program?
Comment: One commenter recommended that we establish clear
standards for ENs to use in providing information to ticket holders
regarding the services provided and expected outcomes.
Response: ENs are required to provide information sufficient for
beneficiaries to make an informed choice regarding
[[Page 67400]]
services and vocational goals and to then agree to and sign an IWP
regarding these services and the vocational goal. Section 1148(f)(4) of
the Act requires that ENs prepare periodic reports on at least an
annual basis itemizing outcomes achieved with respect to services
provided by the EN. Each EN must provide a copy of its latest report to
each beneficiary that it agrees to work with under the Ticket to Work
program. The PM is required to ensure that these reports are available
to the public.
Comment: One commenter indicated that this section should specify
who prescribes an EN's service area.
Response: When responding to the RFP for ENs, an applicant
indicates the geographic area(s) in which it proposes to provide
services to beneficiaries.
Comment: Several commenters indicated that we should reflect the
State VR agency's obligation to follow the law as outlined in the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.),
Response: Section 411.375 in subpart F states that ``The State VR
agency must continue to provide services under the requirements of the
State plan approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), even when functioning as an EN.''
Section 411.385 indicates that the State VR agencies are required to
follow the law as outlined in the Rehabilitation Act which requires the
use of an individualized plan for employment (IPE).
Comment: Several commenters stated that we should use the term
``individualized plan for employment'' as well as IWP.
Response: Sections 411.115(f), (i), and (j) explain that employment
plan means an individual work plan under which an EN (other than a
State VR agency) provides services to a disabled beneficiary under the
Ticket to Work program or an individualized plan for employment under
which a State VR agency provides services. We use IWP to identify the
employment plan developed and implemented by an EN and beneficiary, and
IPE to describe the employment plan agreed to and signed by a State VR
agency and beneficiary.
Comment: Several commenters stated that we should require ENs to
serve any client living in the geographic area they indicate they
serve. The commenters indicated that allowing ENs to choose would
prevent those with the most severe disabilities from getting any
services and ENs would take only the easiest clients.
Response: The Ticket to Work program provides for a voluntary
relationship between the beneficiary and the EN. While an EN may not
discriminate in the provision of services based on a beneficiary's age,
gender, race, color, creed, or national origin, an EN may select the
beneficiaries to whom it will offer services based on factors such as
its assessment of the needs of the beneficiary and of its ability to
help the individual. Requiring the EN to serve all clients in their
geographic area would eliminate the voluntary nature of this
relationship and reduce the number of entities who would choose to
serve beneficiaries as ENs.
Whether there are under-served populations will be assessed as part
of the ongoing evaluations of the Ticket to Work program. Section
101(d)(4) of Public Law 106-170 requires the Commissioner of Social
Security to provide for independent evaluations to assess the
effectiveness of the Ticket to Work program, including evaluation of
``the characteristics of individuals in possession of tickets under the
Program who are not accepted for services and, to the extent reasonably
determinable, the reasons for which such beneficiaries were not
accepted for services.'' The Commissioner is required to provide
periodic reports to the Congress on these evaluations, setting forth
the Commissioner's evaluation ``of the extent to which the Program has
been successful and the Commissioner's conclusions on whether or how
the Program should be modified.'' Section 1148(h)(5)(C) of the Social
Security Act also requires the Commissioner to report to Congress no
later than 36 months after the date of the enactment of Public Law 106-
170 with recommendations for a method or methods to adjust EN payment
rates that would ensure adequate incentives for the provision of
services by ENs of:
Individuals with a need for ongoing support and services;
Individuals with a need for high-cost accommodations;
Individuals who earn a subminimum wage; and
Individuals who work and receive partial cash benefits.
Based on these evaluations, the Commissioner may recommend
modifications of the program to the Congress, or make other necessary
changes within the Commissioner's authority under the Social Security
Act.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern about what would happen to
a beneficiary who refused to work with an EN and faced the possibility
of sanctions.
Response: Section 101(b) of Public Law 106-170 repealed sections
222(b) and 1615(c) of the Act, which provided for the sanctions for VR
refusal.
Comment: Some commenters stated that the requirements in the NPRM
will restrict many private businesses from becoming ENs and do not
offer any incentives to an employer to participate or even become an
EN.
Response: The requirements in the NPRM are intended to strike a
balance between assuring the participation of qualified ENs including
non-traditional providers while protecting beneficiaries by requiring a
certain level of competence by the entities that will serve them. The
incentives provided in section 1148 of the Act for the ENs are the
milestone and outcome payments for achieving results. While no special
incentives are provided in this legislation for employers, we are
confident that employers are qualified to serve as ENs, and that they
will be able to assist beneficiaries to obtain and maintain employment.
Section 411.321 Under What Conditions Will SSA Terminate an Agreement
With an EN Due to Inadequate Performance?
Comment: One commenter recommended that we delete the phrase
``self-supporting employment and leaving the benefit rolls'' as the
goals of our performance standards for ENs.
Response: Enabling beneficiaries to achieve self-supporting
employment and leave the benefit rolls is the goal of the Ticket to
Work program. It is a critical performance standard for ENs and
essential to our evaluation of ENs.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern about the standards SSA
will use to evaluate ENs and whether we will have different standards
for rehabilitation agencies and for ENs.
Response: We will develop appropriate standards to ensure the
capability of ENs to provide the needed services and to achieve
outcomes. For State VR agency performance, SSA will defer to the
standards required by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29
U.S.C. 720 et seq.). As indicated in section 411.375, the State VR
agency must continue to provide services under the requirements of the
State plan approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), even while functioning as an EN.
Section 411.325 What Reporting Requirements Are Placed on an EN as a
Participant in the Ticket to Work Program?
Comment: Several commenters objected to having to provide a
financial report showing the percentage of the EN's budget that was
spent on serving beneficiaries with tickets including the
[[Page 67401]]
amount of time that was spent on beneficiaries who return to work and
those who do not return to work. They indicated that this percentage
reporting would be an extensive process and would require reporting on
time spent working with an individual for which they would not be
compensated. Other commenters felt that the reporting of ticket
acceptance and of the IWP is unnecessary and represents too much
reporting on process as opposed to reporting on beneficiary outcomes.
Another commenter asked for a definition of outcomes to be reported.
One commenter suggested that we include a requirement that the State VR
agency submit an IPE to the PM in Sec. 411.325(b) and (c).
Response: We agree with the commenters that the reporting
requirement regarding percentage of time working with beneficiaries
would place an undue burden on ENs and are eliminating this specific
requirement in our final rule. However, we are required to obtain
information regarding ticket acceptance and the IWP to ensure that
beneficiaries are using their tickets and thus are eligible for
continuing disability review protection, and to determine EN
eligibility for payments under the EN payment systems. We will develop
a national report model, which will define outcomes. We will use the
information we receive from EN reports to identify changes we must make
to the Ticket to Work program in the future. We did not require, in
Sec. 411.325 or elsewhere, the State VR agency to send a copy of the
IPE to the PM, because of concerns expressed by the Rehabilitation
Services Administration and other commenters about the privacy and
confidentiality of client information required by the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.).
Comment: One commenter recommended that we add language to
Sec. 411.325(h) indicating that the EN will collect and record such
data as we shall require by written contractual agreement.
Response: The requirement to collect and record such data as we
shall require will be in our written agreements with ENs. There is no
need to specify ``by contractual agreement'' in Sec. 411.325.
Section 411.330 How Will SSA Evaluate an EN's Performance?
Comment: Some commenters requested information regarding the
specific performance standards SSA will develop to evaluate ENs and
from whom SSA will obtain input for such evaluations. Another commenter
asked whether this evaluation should be the responsibility of the PM.
Response: SSA will develop appropriate performance standards and
will consider input from providers, beneficiaries, and other interested
parties in developing these standards. The PM will assist SSA in
evaluating EN performance. However, SSA is responsible for the final
evaluation because SSA has entered into contractual agreements with ENs
and bears the ultimate responsibility for EN performance and the Ticket
to Work program's success.
Subpart F--State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies' Participation
General Comments and Responses
Comment: Several commenters stated that the State VR agency and the
EN are the same entity in instances in which the VR agency participates
as an EN. These commenters requested that, throughout the final
regulations, whenever reference is made to an EN, such reference
indicate that an EN includes a State VR agency functioning as an EN.
Response: We did not adopt the commenters' recommendation. Some
rules in these final regulations, such as most of the rules in subparts
E and G, apply to entities, other than State VR agencies, which have
entered into agreement with SSA (or wish to do so) to serve as ENs
under the Ticket to Work program. Where necessary, various sections of
the final rules include references to both an EN and a State VR agency
to specify the scope of a particular rule or rules. For the rules in
subpart H which describe the two EN payment systems, references to an
EN generally are intended to encompass a State VR agency functioning as
an EN, unless the context requires otherwise or there is a specific
mention of the State VR agency.
Section 411.350 Must a State VR Agency Participate in the Ticket to
Work Program?
Comment: Several commenters requested that we modify Sec. 411.350,
``Must a State VR agency participate in the Ticket to Work program?''
They indicated that as written this section indicates that a VR agency
must participate as an EN in order to receive payment for services.
They indicated that sections 222(d) and 1615(d) and (e) of the Social
Security Act do not require VR agencies to become ENs.
Response: Section 411.350 has been clarified as follows: ``Each
State agency administering or supervising the administration of the
State plan approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), must participate in the Ticket to Work
program if it wishes to receive payments from SSA for serving disabled
beneficiaries who are issued a ticket.'' Section 411.370, Does a State
VR agency ever have to function as an EN?, states that: ``A State VR
agency does not have to function as an EN when serving a beneficiary
with a ticket if the ticket has not previously been assigned to an EN
or State VR agency or if it has been previously assigned, we have not
made payment under an EN payment system with respect to that ticket.''
(See
Sec. 411.355(a).) Conversely, a State VR agency does have to function
as an EN when it elects one of the EN payment systems for a
beneficiary, on a case-by-case basis. (See Sec. 411.355(b).) However,
as described in Sec. 411.585(b), a State VR agency is precluded from
being paid under the cost reimbursement payment system if an EN or a
State VR agency serving a beneficiary as an EN has been paid by SSA
under one of the EN payment systems with respect to the same ticket.
However, even if the State VR agency is not serving as an EN, it still
must tell the PM whenever a beneficiary with a ticket is accepted for
services.
Section 411.355 What Payment Options Does a State VR Agency Have Under
the Ticket to Work Program?
Comment: One commenter stated that it does not make sense to allow
the State VR agencies to determine on a case-by-case basis how they
will be paid for serving a beneficiary, because that could encourage VR
agencies to seek out the easiest beneficiaries to serve and get them to
employment. The commenter noted that this is the opposite of the State
VR agencies' traditional mandate, which is to give priority to serving
the most severely disabled.
Response: We are not adopting this comment. The Ticket to Work
program does not in any way affect the State VR agency's traditional
mandate to serve the most severely disabled. It merely provides the
State VR agency with an additional payment option in serving
beneficiaries with disabilities who are issued a ticket and who seek
services from the State VR agency rather than from an EN serving under
the program.
Comment: One commenter asked if there would be any changes to the
present process for State VR agencies seeking cost reimbursement
payments.
Response: Under Sec. 411.585(a) of the final rule, if a State VR
agency is paid by SSA under the cost reimbursement payment system with
respect to a ticket,
[[Page 67402]]
such payment precludes any subsequent payment by SSA under one of the
EN payment systems based on the same ticket. Under Sec. 411.585(b) of
the final rules, if an EN or a State VR agency serving a beneficiary as
an EN is paid by SSA under one of the EN payment systems with respect
to a ticket, such payment precludes subsequent payment to a State VR
agency under the cost reimbursement payment system based on the same
ticket. Public Law 106-170 repealed sections 222(b) and 1615(c) of the
Act, effective January 1, 2001. Therefore, sanctions for refusing VR
services without good cause are eliminated. Because the sanctions are
eliminated, cases in which such sanctions are imposed are eliminated
and no longer one of the categories of cases for which State VR
agencies can seek reimbursement. As noted in the preamble, SSA intends
to publish proposed rules in the Federal Register at a later date to
amend the affected regulations to reflect the change in the law.
Comment: One commenter stated that these regulations should state
that the VR reimbursement system continues to operate as a program
available to all beneficiaries with disabilities who are eligible for
VR services. In the commenter's view, as these regulations read now,
reimbursement seems to apply only to ticket holders. State VR agencies
have and will continue to serve many beneficiaries who will not receive
tickets.
Response: We are not adopting this comment. Section 411.355(c)
states that: ``When serving a beneficiary who was not issued a ticket,
the State VR agency may seek payment only under the cost reimbursement
payment system.''
Section 411.365 How Does a State VR Agency Notify SSA About Its Choice
of a Payment System for Use When Functioning as an EN?
Comment: Several commenters stated that Sec. 411.365(a) should be
revised to reflect that the State Agency must respond in writing only
if it intends to function as an EN to make it clear that a State VR
agency does not have to function as an EN.
Response: We are not adopting this recommendation. Under
Sec. 411.585(b) of the final rules, if an EN or a State VR agency
serving a beneficiary as an EN is paid by us under one of the EN
payment systems with respect to a ticket, such payment precludes
subsequent payment to a State VR agency under the cost reimbursement
payment system based on the same ticket. The only payment system
available to a State VR agency under this rule would be the EN payment
system elected in response to the letter identified in Sec. 411.365(a).
Comment: Some commenters stated that Sec. 411.365(b) should be
revised to allow for the appropriate administrative authority other
than the Governor to sign the letter reflecting the State VR agency's
preferred payment method when functioning as a EN.
Response: We agree, and have revised Sec. 411.365(b) in the final
rules to indicate that ``[t]he director of the State agency
administering or supervising the administration of the State plan
approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
(29 U.S.C. 720, et seq.) or the director's designee must sign the State
VR agency's letter.''
Section 411.370 Does a State VR Agency Ever Have To Function as an EN?
Comment: Several commenters noted that proposed Sec. 411.370
provides that ``even if the State VR agency is not serving as an EN, it
still must tell the program manager whenever a beneficiary with a
ticket is accepted for services to ensure that the beneficiary's ticket
is assigned to that agency.'' The commenters stated that this provision
would appear to indicate that all a VR agency needs to do to have a
ticket assigned to it is to tell the PM that they are working with the
individual. They noted that Sec. 411.370 seems to be contradicted by
Sec. 411.385, which states that the State VR agencies must have
beneficiaries sign a form when they wish to assign their Ticket to Work
to a VR agency.
Response: Proposed sections 411.370 and 411.385 are not in
conflict. In the final rules, however, we have made changes to clarify
Sec. 411.370. Section 411.370 explains that State VR agencies may
choose on a case-by-case basis to function as an EN when serving a
beneficiary with a ticket, or they may serve beneficiaries under the
cost reimbursement system, subject to the limitations described in
Sec. 411.585. In either situation, State VR agencies must tell the PM
that a beneficiary has been accepted for services in order for the
ticket to be assigned to that agency. If a beneficiary with a ticket
decides to seek services from the State VR agency, then the beneficiary
will in effect be using the ticket for those services, even if the
State VR agency chooses to be reimbursed rather than being paid under
one of the EN payment systems. The process that the State VR agency
will use to inform the PM is provided in Sec. 411.385(a) and (b).
Section 411.385 What Does a State VR Agency Do if a Beneficiary Who Is
Eligible for VR Services Has a Ticket That Is Available for Assignment?
Comment: Several commenters noted that, under proposed
Sec. 411.385, when a beneficiary signs an Individualized Plan for
Employment (IPE) as defined under the Rehabilitation Act, the
beneficiary automatically has assigned the ticket to the State VR
agency, regardless of whether the VR agency elects to participate as an
EN with respect to the beneficiary. These commenters believe that
Sec. 411.385 negates beneficiary choice, which, as they state, is the
hallmark of the Ticket to Work program. They noted that disability
beneficiaries are presumptively eligible for State VR services without
the ticket. They further indicated that if the State VR agency receives
payment under the cost reimbursement payment system, Sec. 411.585
provides that we cannot make payment to an EN. They argued that this
would deny beneficiaries the use of their tickets at a later time.
Response: The Ticket to Work program increases beneficiary choice
by expanding the options available for disability beneficiaries to
access employment services, vocational rehabilitation services, and
other support services that are necessary for them to find and retain
employment and reduce dependency on cash benefit programs.
Beneficiaries can choose to receive services from either the State VR
agency or other service providers approved to participate as ENs.
Beneficiaries with a ticket that can be assigned who decide to work
with an EN other than a State VR agency will agree to and sign an
individual work plan. Similarly, beneficiaries with a ticket that can
be assigned who decide to work with the State VR agency will agree to
and sign an IPE required under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.). In both circumstances, the
beneficiaries have decided to participate in the Ticket to Work program
by working with a provider to receive services necessary to help them
go to work. Further, beneficiaries who are not satisfied with the
services they receive from their chosen providers are able to reassign
their ticket if they meet the requirements of Sec. 411.150. See the
comment and response section of subpart H for a discussion of the
conditions that must be met to allow a State VR agency and EN to both
receive payment for serving a beneficiary based on the same ticket.
Comment: Two commenters requested that Sec. 411.385(a) be rewritten
to clarify
[[Page 67403]]
that the individual must be determined eligible prior to developing an
IPE and that both the individual and the VR counselor must sign the
IPE.
Response: Section 411.385(a) has been revised to indicate that once
the State VR agency determines that a beneficiary is eligible for VR
services, the beneficiary and a representative of the State VR agency
must agree to and sign the IPE, and that the requirements of
Sec. 411.140(d) or Sec. 411.150(a) and (b) also must be met.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that we delete the phrase
``working with the beneficiary'' from Sec. 411.385(b) because it is
overly specific and limits who can sign the information being provided
to the PM by the State VR agency.
Response: We agree and are revising Sec. 411.385(b) to delete
``working with the beneficiary.''
Section 411.390 What Does a State VR Agency Do if a Beneficiary to
Whom it Is Already Providing Services Has a Ticket That Is Available
for Assignment?
Comment: Several commenters identified a conflict between proposed
Secs. 411.390 and 411.510(c) regarding a State VR agency's payment
election options with respect to a beneficiary already receiving VR
services under an IPE before the beneficiary receives a ticket and
assigns it to the State VR agency.
Response: We are revising Sec. 411.390 to remove the provision that
conflicted with Sec. 411.510(c). Section 411.510(c) of the final rules
provides that for each beneficiary who already is a client of the State
VR agency prior to receiving a ticket, the State VR agency will notify
the PM of its payment system election at the time the beneficiary
decides to assign the ticket to it.
Comment: Some commenters stated that proposed Sec. 411.390 should
be revised to provide that the State VR agency should automatically be
considered as the holder of the ticket for current clients unless and
until the beneficiary opts to change providers.
Response: We are not adopting this comment. Beneficiaries who are
receiving services from the State VR agency under an existing IPE when
they receive their ticket should have the opportunity to make an
informed choice regarding their participation in the Ticket to Work
program. Beneficiaries will be able to decide whether or not they wish
to assign their ticket to the State VR agency. This includes
beneficiaries who are determined eligible for a ticket upon
implementation of the Ticket to Work program in a State and
beneficiaries who are determined ineligible for a ticket when the
Ticket to Work program is implemented in a State but later become
eligible for a ticket.
Section 411.395 Is a State VR Agency Required To Provide Periodic
Reports?
Comments: One commenter stated that Sec. 411.395 should prescribe
how periodic reports on outcomes should be transmitted, and that an
electronic infrastructure should be in place and operational prior to
implementation of the Ticket to Work program.
Response: We are not adopting this recommendation to regulate the
process for transmitting reports between a State VR agency and the PM.
The PM will contact each State VR agency in States where the Ticket to
Work program has been implemented to address the process for collecting
information.
Comment: Several commenters stated that SSA should accept reports
submitted by State VR agencies to the Rehabilitation Services
Administration rather than creating additional reporting requirements
for these agencies. Their concern is that reporting will be excessive
and may duplicate or conflict with existing requirements under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended and the Workforce Investment Act
of 1998, as amended.
Response: Reports that State VR agencies provide to the Department
of Education's Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) may be used
to meet the reporting requirements in section 411.395. However, at this
time, we cannot say whether these existing reports will provide us with
all of the information we need to fulfill our reporting requirements.
The periodic outcomes reports discussed in section 411.395(a) are
required by section 1148(f)(4) of the Social Security Act. They are a
new reporting requirement for State VR agencies functioning as ENs. The
reports discussed in section 411.395(b) are required so beneficiaries
may take advantage of the new protection in section 1148(i) of the
Social Security Act which prevents us from initiating a continuing
disability review when the beneficiaries are using a ticket. We will
work with RSA to share information whenever possible and avoid
duplication of State VR agencies' existing reporting burden.
Comment: One commenter indicated that Sec. 411.395 should be
written to reflect confidentiality issues as outlined in the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.
Response: We have not adopted this suggestion. The contract that
the PM and ENs sign with SSA includes the requirement that access to
confidential information must be restricted and that such information
must be protected. Section 411.375 states that State VR agencies are
required to provide VR services under a State plan approved under title
I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et
seq.), even when functioning as an EN. This includes the
confidentiality requirement that a State VR agency must follow.
Comment: One commenter noted that Sec. 411.395 involves the State
VR agencies in conducting reviews necessary to ensure that the
beneficiary is making timely progress towards self-supporting
employment while the same is not true for ENs. The commenter questioned
why the EN wouldn't be able to validate that beneficiaries are making
timely progress.
Response: Section 411.190 states that the PM will be using
information provided by the EN or State VR agency in making the
determination that a beneficiary is actively participating in his or
her employment plan. Section 411.395(b) requires the State VR agency to
submit this information. We are revising Sec. 411.325 to require the
same information from an EN.
Comment: This commenter also stated that the wording in
Sec. 411.395(b) should be changed from: ``The State VR agency must also
submit information to assist the PM conducting the reviews necessary to
assess a beneficiary's timely progress towards self-supporting
employment to determine if a beneficiary is using a ticket for purposes
of suspending continuing disability reviews'' to: ``The State VR agency
must also submit information to assist the PM conducting the reviews
necessary to assess a beneficiary's timely progress towards self-
supporting employment to ensure a beneficiary is not using a ticket to
avoid continuing disability reviews.''
Response: We are not adopting this comment. The purpose of the PM's
review is to determine whether a beneficiary's active participation
qualifies for CDR suspension under section 1148(i) of the Act. As long
as a beneficiary is meeting the guidelines for timely progress toward
self-supporting employment, the CDR suspension applies.
Section 411.405 When Does an Agreement Between an EN and the State VR
Agency Have To Be in Place?
Comment: Commenters stated that Sec. 411.400 (Can an EN to which a
beneficiary's ticket is assigned refer the beneficiary to a State VR
agency for services?) and Sec. 411.405 should state that the agreements
between ENs and
[[Page 67404]]
State VR agencies need to conform to the requirements of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C 720 et seq.)
Response: We have not adopted this suggestion. Section 1148(c)(3)
of the Act, Agreements between State Agencies and Employment Networks,
does not require that the State VR agency and EN agreement must conform
to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.).
Comment: Several commenters stated that there is no mention of ENs
being able to enter into agreements with one-stop delivery systems
established under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
Response: Section 1148(c)(3) of the Act provides that State
agencies and ENs shall enter into agreements regarding the conditions
under which services will be provided when an individual is referred by
an EN to a State agency for services. Section 411.320 regulates the
responsibilities of an EN in the Ticket to Work program. Section
411.320(c) provides that an EN may enter into agreements with other
entities to provide employment services, vocational rehabilitation
services, or other support services to a beneficiary.
On a related point, section 1148(f)(1)(B) of the Act states that an
EN serving under the Ticket to Work program may consist of a one-stop
delivery system established under subtitle B of title I of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998, as amended. This provision is
reflected in Sec. 411.305(c) of these final regulations. As indicated
in Sec. 411.320(c), discussed above, a one-stop delivery system that is
serving as an EN can enter into agreements as necessary to provide
services to a beneficiary. As required of all non-State VR agency ENs,
a one-stop delivery system that is an EN must have an agreement in
place with a State VR agency before it can refer a beneficiary to the
State VR agency for services.
Comment: One commenter stated that the regulations or preamble
should clarify that the regulations do not require a separate agreement
and may be satisfied by a local Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
established under title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, or a
modification to such MOU that contains the specified information.
Response: Section 1148(c)(3) of the Act does not specify the format
of the agreements required between the State VR agencies and ENs. Any
agreement must adhere to the requirements of Sec. 411.400, which
specifies that the agreement must be in writing and signed by the State
VR agency and the EN prior to the EN referring any beneficiary to the
State VR agency for services. If a MOU satisfies these requirements, it
would constitute a valid agreement.
Section 411.410 Does Each Referral From an EN to a State VR Agency
Require Its Own Agreement?
Comment: Another commenter noted that Sec. 411.410 indicates that
agreements between ENs and State VR agencies should be broad-based and
apply to all beneficiaries who may be referred to the State VR agency
for services. The commenter stated that broad-based agreements ignore
the uniqueness of each case and may prohibit an individual from
receiving specialized services that are necessary in order to return to
competitive employment. The commenter also noted that there is no
mention of whether the agreement between the EN and State VR agency can
be terminated. The commenter recommended that, in addition to broad-
based agreements, ENs and State VR agencies might also create distinct
agreements based on the specific needs of the individual being served,
and that both the EN and the State VR agencies should have the ability
to terminate their agreement if the needs of the individual are not
being served.
Response: We agree with the commenter's first recommendation. We
are adding language to Sec. 411.410 to indicate that the general
guideline that the agreement should be broad-based and apply to all
beneficiaries who may be referred by an EN to a State VR agency is not
intended to preclude an EN and a State VR agency from entering into an
individualized agreement to meet the needs of a single beneficiary if
both the EN and the State VR agency wish to do so. What is agreed to in
the agreement concerning the conditions for providing VR services to
beneficiaries referred by an EN and the process for terminating the
agreement must be negotiated between the State VR agency and the EN.
Section 411.420 What Information Should Be Included in an Agreement
Between an EN and a State VR Agency?
Comment: Several commenters stated that SSA should not be
establishing the terms of the agreement between the State VR agency and
the EN in the regulations. Other commenters indicated that we should
modify Sec. 411.420 to provide minimum requirements for these
agreements. One commenter stated that we should specify when the State
VR agency will pay the ENs for services. Another commenter stated that
the State VR agency would be in a position to negotiate terms of the
agreement wholly favorable to its own interests. The commenter
recommended that the rules should stipulate that each party to the
agreement share reimbursement equitably, and that the rules to be
applied by the PM in cases where disputes arise should be clearly
defined prior to implementation.
Response: We are not establishing the terms of any agreement
entered into between a State VR agency and an EN. Section 1148(c)(3) of
the Act states that: ``State agencies and employment networks shall
enter into agreements regarding the conditions under which services
will be provided when an individual is referred by an employment
network to a State agency for services. The Commissioner shall
establish by regulations the time frame within which such agreements
must be entered into and the mechanisms for dispute resolution between
State agencies and employment networks with respect to such
agreements.'' The Act does not provide SSA with the authority to set
minimum standards or to regulate payment or fee schedules for these
agreements. The introductory text of Sec. 411.420 paraphrases the
language in the Act regarding the basic nature of the agreements and
paragraphs (a) through (d) of that section provide examples only of the
types of information that could be included in any agreement. These
regulations place no requirements on what should be included in an
agreement.
Comment: Several commenters stated that, regardless of whether
there is an agreement in place when a beneficiary is referred to a
State VR agency, recently published Department of Education
regulations, 34 CFR part 361, require State VR agencies to process all
applications for services. The commenters noted that the State VR
agencies will not be expected to expend program funds on services that
are comparable to the services the individual is already receiving from
the EN to which the individual's ticket is assigned. The commenters
noted that further clarification is needed concerning a State VR
agency's responsibility to provide additional needed services without a
signed agreement with the EN.
Response: The Department of Education's, Rehabilitation Services
Administration is the entity responsible for administering the State VR
program. State VR agencies should contact the Rehabilitation Services
Administration for guidance on expending State VR program funds on
beneficiaries where no agreement exist with an EN.
[[Page 67405]]
Comment: Several commenters stated that Secs. 411.405 to 411.430 do
not address instances where individuals might have assigned their
ticket to an EN, yet decide on their own to come to the State VR agency
for additional services. In these instances, the EN is not making the
referral, and an agreement may not be in place between the EN and the
State VR agency. This may create a situation where a beneficiary is
being served by both an EN and the State VR agency outside of the
governance of an agreement. The commenters suggested expanding the
rules in these sections to require that agreements will be in place
between all ENs and State VR agencies, to ensure that all ticket
holders are covered by an agreement.
Response: We are not adopting the commenters' suggestion. Section
1148(c)(3) of the Act requires agreements between State VR agencies and
ENs regarding the conditions under which services will be provided when
an individual is referred by an EN to a State VR agency for services.
SSA does not have the authority to require an EN to enter into an
agreement with a State VR agency unless the EN is going to make a
referral of beneficiaries to a State VR agency for services.
Section 411.435 How Will Disputes Arising Under the Agreements Between
ENs and State VR Agencies Be Resolved?
Comment: One commenter recommended a change to Sec. 411.435(c)(2),
to provide a time frame within which SSA must decide the matter in
dispute between an EN and a State VR agency in a case where either
party makes a timely request for SSA review following receipt of the
PM's recommended resolution to the dispute. The commenter recommended
adding a provision to provide that SSA will have 20 days to determine a
resolution to the dispute.
Response: We do not agree that these regulations should establish a
time frame for us to resolve disputes. We agree that we must resolve
disputes as quickly as possible. However, a rigid time frame would be
inadvisable due to the potential complexity of disputes involved.
Comment: One commenter noted that the rules do not mention the
State VR agency's legal obligation to serve eligible individuals
whether an agreement with an EN is in place. The commenter said it is
essential that State VR agencies retain the ability to be paid under
the cost reimbursement system.
Response: Under the Ticket to Work program, we will pay a State VR
agency for providing services to a beneficiary who is issued a ticket
and assigns or reassigns the ticket to the State VR agency if certain
conditions are met. Section 411.355(a) of the final regulation states
that State VR agencies may choose to participate either as an EN or
under the cost reimbursement payment system, subject to the limitations
in Sec. 411.585. The section further states that the State VR agency
makes this choice on a case-by-case basis. Section 411.370 states that
a State VR agency generally is not restricted in making its choice of
participating either as an EN or under the cost reimbursement payment
system, with the exception of the rule under Sec. 411.585.
Comment: One commenter questioned how a beneficiary who chooses an
EN other than a State VR agency would access the State VR agency for
assistance with assistive technology for employment purposes. The
commenter observed that a person with a disability who needs assistive
technology in order to work can request assistance from the State VR
Agency. The commenter asks if this can be done under the Ticket to Work
program without the beneficiary reassigning his or her ticket to the
State VR Agency.
Response: If the EN to whom the beneficiary has assigned his or her
ticket has a signed agreement with the State VR agency, the EN could
refer the beneficiary to the State VR agency to secure the services
needed. If the beneficiary's EN has not entered into an agreement with
the State VR agency, the beneficiary's EN would be required to enter
into an agreement with the State VR agency before the EN could refer
the beneficiary to the State VR agency for services.
Comment: One commenter stated that the regulations suggest that
there is only one State VR agency per State. The commenter noted that
this is not true for all States. In some States, there is a separate
blind services unit. The commenter asked whether two separate
agreements have to be in place between the EN and the two VR entities
in the State in such an instance.
Response: The configuration of the State VR agencies within the
State government's organizational structure would determine if an EN
would need to enter into an agreement with one or two State VR agencies
in a particular State. We are clarifying the definition of State
vocational rehabilitation agency in final Sec. 411.115(m) to reflect
that some States have more than one agency that provides VR services.
Subpart G--Requirements for Individual Work Plans
Section 411.450 What Is an IWP?
Comment: One commenter was of the opinion that State VR agencies
would have to complete an IWP and an IPE based on this regulation.
Response: In accordance with 1148(c)(2) of the Act, the State VR
agency will continue to provide services under the requirements of the
State plan approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.) when providing services as an EN. The
State VR agencies continue to prepare an Individualized Plan for
Employment (IPE) for all clients served. We are clarifying Sec. 411.450
so that it does not give the impression that a State VR agency is
required to complete an IWP. In the first sentence of Sec. 411.450 we
added in parenthesis ``(other than a State VR agency)'' to clarify that
State VR agencies are not required to complete an IWP.
Comment: A few commenters suggested that we add the definition of
IWP in its entirety in the definition section of the rules.
Response: This suggestion was adopted. The IWP and many other new
terms now are included in final Sec. 411.115.
Comment: A few commenters wrote that whenever possible the
regulations should encourage that the IWP and similar life/work
planning instruments such as the IPE or individualized service delivery
plan be used interchangeably.
Response: Other employment plans that are developed based on
specific guidelines and laws may not be used as a substitute for the
IWP unless they satisfy the requirements of the IWP in Sec. 411.465.
Section 411.455 What Is the Purpose of an IWP?
Comment: One commenter suggested alternate language to describe the
purpose of an IWP. The commenter suggested that the wording be changed
to read ``Both parties should develop and implement the IWP in
partnership in a manner that gives the beneficiary the opportunity to
exercise informed choice in selecting an employment goal.'' The
commenter also suggested using the term ``define'' in place of the term
``outline'' when naming services that will be provided under an IWP.
Response: The wording that was used in describing the purpose of
the IWP was taken from the law. Section 1148(g)(1)(B) of the Act
requires that ``[e]ach employment network shall * * * develop and
implement each
[[Page 67406]]
such individual work plan, in partnership with each beneficiary.'' The
intent of the IWP is to outline, not define, the services that have
been mutually agreed to by the EN and the beneficiary.
Section 411.460 Who Is Responsible for Determining What Information Is
Contained in the IWP?
Comment: One commenter stated that a beneficiary could not exercise
informed choice if the EN was not required to provide the beneficiary
with a comprehensive list of the services available to support and
facilitate an IWP.
Response: Section 1148(g)(1)(B) of the Act requires the IWP to be
developed in partnership with the beneficiary and the EN. ENs will
offer services themselves, or coordinate the delivery of services by
others, or both. The services that any individual beneficiary may
require will present different opportunities for an EN to meet. Given
the varied nature of the beneficiaries that an EN may serve and the
services that an EN may provide or coordinate, we do not believe that a
requirement to provide a comprehensive list of such services would be
meaningful.
Comment: We received several comments noting that our proposed
Sec. 411.465 stated that an EN may not request or receive compensation
from the beneficiary for the services they provide, even though the
Rehabilitation Act and other programs allow and sometimes require
beneficiaries to financially participate in the cost of their plan.
Response: Section 1148(b)(4) of the Act states that ``An employment
network may not request or receive compensation for such services from
the beneficiary.'' However, the Act does not prohibit an EN from
requesting a beneficiary who has assigned his or her ticket to it to
participate in the cost of achieving the employment outcomes agreed to
in the IWP. Section 1148(c)(2) of the Act states that State VR agencies
are to provide services under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.) when providing services as an
EN. Therefore, section 1148 of the Act does not relieve a beneficiary
from financially participating in the cost of an individualized plan
for employment, if this is required by the Rehabilitation Act.
Comment: We received one comment noting that our proposed
Sec. 411.465 provided that an EN shall provide a statement of remedies
available to the individual, including information about the
availability of the advocacy services through the State P&A system. The
commenter went on to discuss other regulations outside of the Ticket to
Work program such as the Client Assistance Program (CAP) for resolving
disputes. The commenter recommended that Sec. 411.465 be revised to
reflect services available to individuals who use the public VR system,
such as the CAP.
Response: State VR agencies continue to provide services based on
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.).
Therefore, the CAP would continue to be used by State VR agencies in
resolving disputes between the State VR agency and the beneficiary.
Section Sec. 411.465 covers a beneficiary who signs an IWP with an EN
other than a State VR agency.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the minimum requirements of
the IWP specifically state that an EN use comparable benefits whenever
available.
Response: We are not adopting this comment. The definition of
``comparable'' benefits is found in 34 CFR 361.53 and applies to State
VR agencies. Section 1148 of the Act does not require ENs to determine
whether comparable benefits are available when providing services to a
beneficiary.
Comment: One individual expressed concerns that a beneficiary who
assigns his or her ticket would lose the ticket if the beneficiary did
not do what the EN requested.
Response: Participation in the Ticket to Work program is voluntary.
An EN cannot take the beneficiary's ticket away for failure to comply
with an EN's request. The beneficiary remains free to reassign his or
her ticket to another EN.
Comment: A commenter suggested that the minimum requirement for an
IWP include a statement about the beneficiary's responsibility to not
reassign his or her ticket without good cause.
Response: We are not adopting this comment. Section 1148 of the Act
does not require that the beneficiary have good cause for reassigning
his or her ticket to another EN.
Comment: Several commenters suggested that time frames be
identified for providing specific services.
Response: We are not adopting this comment. The IWP developed for
an individual with a disability will vary based on the needs of the
individual, their ability to progress based on the disability, and the
employment goal that is established. Regulating time frames for
providing services at such an early stage may be intimidating for some
individuals or ENs. If the beneficiary and the EN feel comfortable with
establishing time frames, they have the flexibility to do so under
these regulations.
Comment: One commenter stated that within the requirements of an
IWP there is a provision that the individual has a right of privacy
without any further definition or clarification of the term privacy.
The commenter expressed concern that an individual's decision not to
share relevant information with an EN could be critical to the success
of the individual's rehabilitation. The commenter recommended that the
term ``privacy'' be removed or adequately defined. Another commenter
asked what the requirements were for an EN to obtain medical
information for the IWP and what the requirements were before the EN
could share that information.
Response: Section 411.465(a)(8) requires that an IWP must include
``A statement of the beneficiary's rights to privacy and
confidentiality regarding personal information, including information
about the beneficiary's disability.'' The EN's contract with SSA will
include the requirement that the EN protect an individual's privacy and
confidentiality. Personal and medical information must be obtained
through the beneficiary. Once the information is obtained from the
beneficiary, the EN's contract requires the EN to preserve the privacy
and confidentiality of these records.
Section 411.470 When Does an IWP Become Effective?
Comment: One commenter said that our description in the proposed
rule of when an IWP becomes effective was unclear.
Response: We have revised Sec. 411.470 to clarify when an IWP
becomes effective.
Subpart H--Employment Network Payment Systems
General
Comment: Many commenters recommended that we redesign the proposed
outcome-milestone payment system so that it would be more supportive of
small-to-mid-sized providers. They said that smaller providers, unlike
State VR agencies and other large service providers, do not have the
reserves to absorb the risk of providing services over an extended
period of time or when they are expensive. The commenters said that, if
the outcome-milestone payment system fails to provide enough up-front
financial incentives and it takes a substantial amount of time before
ENs can claim reimbursement, the Ticket to Work program would restrict
the pool of
[[Page 67407]]
providers and undermine consumer choice. Some said that the proposed
rules offered little improvement over the alternative participant
program for payment for VR services that was intended to expand
beneficiary access under the traditional VR cost reimbursement program.
The commenters were concerned that the rules, as proposed, would not
enhance beneficiary access to services and would not be flexible enough
to help ENs serve the diverse needs of the disabled beneficiary
population. Also, they predicted that the proposed payment system would
encourage providers to ``cream'' the easier-to-serve clients, place
many in ``any'' job, as opposed to developing the sort of career
opportunities that are likely to result in permanent gains for both
consumers and SSA, and that providers would not serve those with more
severe disabilities.
Response: In response to these comments, we made four changes to
the outcome-milestone payment system we proposed. First, we added two
milestones. Second, we doubled the total value of the potential
milestone payments. Third, we spread, over 60 months as opposed to 12,
the outcome payment reductions made on account of milestone payments
received. Fourth, we substituted a flat outcome payment rate of 34
percent for the graduated monthly outcome payments we proposed. We did
not narrow the gap between the two payment systems, as recommended by
many commenters.
These changes are discussed further below, in response to specific
comments.
Section 411.500 Definitions of Terms Used in This Subpart
Comment: A few commenters said that the sample payment calculation
bases we provided in the preamble to the proposed rule (65 FR 82853)
seemed low. They suggested that, when we compute the actual payment
calculation bases, we include only the average cash benefits of
beneficiaries eligible for tickets. These commenters and another
commenter also suggested that we consider increasing the payment
calculation bases, and therefore the potential payments to ENs, by
taking into account the additional program revenues (e.g., FICA taxes)
and other savings (e.g., reduced Medicare/Medicaid costs resulting from
employer-provided health insurance plans) that are generated by having
a beneficiary go to work.
Two other commenters said that using the average Federal payment
amount for title XVI only beneficiaries as a payment calculation base
was inflexible because it did not include State supplementation
payments. The commenters said that the proposed calculations would not
adequately compensate ENs that provide services in States where there
are higher service costs or serve those who are the most disabled.
Response: We did not and can not modify these final rules with
regard to the calculation of the payment calculation bases as the
commenters suggested because section 1148(h)(4) of the Act provides
specific requirements on how to calculate them. When we calculate the
payment calculation bases, the law does not allow us to exclude the
average benefit payable to non-ticket holders or to account for any
FICA taxes or other benefit savings. In addition, section
1148(h)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act specifically directs us to exclude the
State supplementation payment from the title XVI payment calculation
base computation.
Comment: One commenter suggested that we expand proposed
Sec. 411.500(b) and (c) to explain that outcome payments can be
affected by a beneficiary's impairment related work expenses (IRWEs) or
the application of the provisions in section 1619(a) of the Act.
Another commenter asked that we explain the effect of a beneficiary's
trial work period (TWP) on the 60-month outcome payment period.
Response: We did not expand the final rules as the commenters
suggested. The effect that employment support provisions can have on
the disability benefits of those who work can vary depending on the
individual case facts. To the extent that employment support provisions
allow a beneficiary to receive a Federal cash benefit, they will
prohibit us from making outcome payments with respect to the
beneficiary. For example, the trial work period allows beneficiaries
who receive title II disability benefits to test their ability to work
for at least nine months. During this period they can receive full
benefits regardless of how high their earnings might be so long as they
have a disabling impairment. As long as the beneficiaries are in their
TWP and receiving Federal cash disability benefits, their ENs would not
qualify for outcome payments. We have a publication, A Summary Guide to
Employment Support Available to People with Disabilities under the
Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income
Programs, SSA Pub. No. 64-030, that provides a general description of
the employment supports available to beneficiaries with disabilities.
This publication is available on our website at http://www.ssa.gov/
work/ResourcesToolkit/redbook_page.html.
Section 411.515 Can the EN Change Its Elected Payment System?
Comment: Two commenters expressed concern that the 18-month time
frame in proposed Sec. 411.515(c) for offering ENs the opportunity to
change their elected payment system was too long. According to one
commenter, this long a period would hinder recruitment of potential ENs
because providers will be looking for flexibility to help ease their
apprehension over the risks associated with their participation. The
other commenter suggested that we allow ENs to change their elections
at least quarterly.
Response: We did not adopt these comments because we believe that
the language in final Sec. 411.515(b) and (c) is flexible enough to
address these commenters concerns. Section 411.515(b) offers ENs the
opportunity to change their elected payment system at any time during
the 12 months following the later of the month they first elect an EN
payment system or the month we implement the Ticket to Work program in
their State. In addition, Sec. 411.515(c) states that we will offer an
open election period to ENs ``at least every 18 months.'' This language
allows us to offer an open election period more frequently, if we
believe it is warranted.
Section 411.525 How Are the EN Payments Calculated Under Each of the
Two EN Payment Systems?
Comment: A few commenters urged us to relate the EN payment systems
more to the cost of services, especially for those with more extensive
service needs. Along these lines, one commenter suggested that we
consider making the VR cost reimbursement payment system available to
ENs. This commenter also suggested that we make payments whenever ENs
establish that they provided significant efforts and services to assist
beneficiaries because this commenter believes that improving the
vocational skills of beneficiaries will ultimately lead to the
reduction or elimination of benefits. We also received a recommendation
for paying a stipend to vocational trainers and beneficiaries in lieu
of 60 months of outcome payments.
Response: We did not adopt these suggestions because the Ticket to
Work program is an outcome-based program and the law does not provide
authority for the types of payments identified by the commenters. We
therefore cannot design a payment system around the cost of services,
even for those with
[[Page 67408]]
more extensive service needs, or to make stipend payments in lieu of
outcome payments. We do not have the authority to extend the VR cost
reimbursement program to ENs that are not State VR agencies.
Comment: One commenter believed that the outcome payments we
proposed were too low. Based on experiences in welfare reform, this
commenter did not believe that the proposed payment system would
attract a wide variety of service providers. The commenter expressed
the belief that the Ticket to Work program would be viewed as risky for
providers because they lack the experiential data with which to
estimate beneficiary work efforts. The commenter also believed that the
proposed payment system would not attract smaller service providers
because of the cash-flow concerns that such providers would have.
Agreeing that an outcome based payment system was fiscally responsible,
this commenter suggested we ``front-load'' the outcome payments in the
first year, paying as much as 100% of the saved benefits. Then, in
subsequent years, we could reduce payments some, but leave enough to
encourage the ENs to provide for follow-up support services.
Response: We did not adopt this comment. Section 1148(h)(2)(C) of
the Act limits payments under the outcome payment system to 40 percent
of the payment calculation base.
Comment: We received several comments about the two substantial
gainful activity (SGA) dollar thresholds in proposed
Secs. 411.525(a)(1)(ii)(A) and 411.535(a). The commenters were
concerned that ENs might be discouraged from serving beneficiaries who
are statutorily blind because the SGA threshold amount for them
(currently $1,240) is higher than it is for those who are not
statutorily blind (currently $740). Thus, the commenters recommended
that we use the lower SGA threshold amount when we determine whether to
pay an EN, regardless of the beneficiary's disability.
Response: We did not adopt this suggestion because we do not
believe it appropriate to have a threshold amount for outcome or
milestone purposes for beneficiaries who are blind that is not equal to
the blind SGA threshold amount for benefit determination purposes.
Individuals who are blind have several protections, including a higher
earnings threshold. Thus, we believe that payments due an EN should
reflect this higher limit.
Comment: Many commenters had two concerns about the proposed
differences in the payments for title II and title XVI beneficiaries.
The first is that the proposed payment levels for title XVI only
beneficiaries would be substantially lower than for title II (including
concurrent) beneficiaries. The second is that since section 1619(a) of
the Act allows for a gradual reduction of title XVI benefits, it may
take longer for title XVI recipients to achieve outcome payments than
it would for title II beneficiaries. For example, a title XVI recipient
who receives the maximum SSI benefit would need to earn $1,145 in order
to reduce benefits to zero and generate an outcome payment, while a
title II beneficiary who is not blind would need to earn just over $740
in a month to reduce benefits to zero and generate an outcome payment.
The commenters contended that SSI recipients are likely to have more
severe disabilities, less education and work history, and require more
intensive and extensive supports. The commenters said that the lack of
a uniform income level to trigger outcome payments made the Ticket to
Work program confusing. They predicted that the differences will
discourage ENs from serving title XVI recipients. Also, they said that
our proposed formula overlooked the additional cost savings from
reduced reliance on title XVI benefits and increased employment taxes
paid by working beneficiaries. The commenters recommended that we
increase the payment levels to ENs for serving title XVI only
beneficiaries, with some suggesting we pay ENs the same amount
regardless of whether they serve a title XVI only or a title II
beneficiary. The commenters also recommended that we establish a
uniform income level as a trigger for outcome payments and allow for
outcome payments based on a partial reduction of title XVI Federal cash
benefits.
Response: We cannot adopt the commenters' recommendations to make
outcome payments for title XVI only beneficiaries richer or to let an
alternative event, such as the partial reduction in benefits, trigger
outcome payments. The law is very specific about how we are to
calculate payment levels and what events trigger outcome payments.
However, the law also provides for us to study and report to Congress
on the extent to which the Ticket to Work program has been successful
and what further modifications should be made. Specifically, section
1148(h)(5)(C) of the Act requires us to evaluate and report on the
adequacy of the incentives for ENs to serve four specific groups of
individuals. They are individuals with a need for ongoing support and
services, individuals with a need for high-cost accommodations,
individuals who earn a sub-minimum wage and individuals who work and
receive partial cash benefits. Also, section 101(d)(4) of Public Law
106-170 requires a broader evaluation and report on the success of the
Ticket to Work program. Therefore, we will be studying how effective
the program is in serving title XVI beneficiaries.
We based our proposal for the payment levels on section
1148(h)(2)(C) and 1148(h)(4)(A) of the Act. Under section 1148(h)(2)(C)
of the Act, we have to base outcome payments on a fixed percentage of
the payment calculation base for the calendar year in which the month
occurs. With respect to the payment calculation base, section
1148(h)(4)(A) of the Act provides for two payment calculation bases.
The first is based on the average monthly title II disability insurance
benefit payable for months during the preceding calendar year. We must
use it in connection with a title II beneficiary. The second payment
calculation base is based on the average monthly payment of title XVI
benefits based on disability (excluding State supplementation) payable
for months during the preceding calendar year to beneficiaries aged 18
through 64. We must use this second payment calculation base in
connection with a title XVI beneficiary who is not concurrently a title
II beneficiary.
We based our proposal to limit outcome payments to situations in
which monthly Federal SSI cash benefits to a title XVI disability
beneficiary stop due to work or earnings on sections 1148(h)(2)(B),
(k)(4), and (k)(5) of the Act. Under section 1148(h)(2)(B) of the Act,
an outcome payment month is a month, during an individual's outcome
payment period, ``for which benefits (described in paragraphs (3) and
(4) of subsection (k)) are not payable to such individual because of
work or earnings.'' With respect to a title XVI disability beneficiary,
the benefits described in section 1148(k)(4) of the Act are
``supplemental security income benefits under title XVI'' based on
blindness or disability. The term ``supplemental security income
benefit under title XVI'' is defined in section 1148(k)(5) of the Act
to mean ``a cash benefit under section 1611 or 1619(a),'' excluding any
State supplementary payment. Thus, in formulating the proposed rules on
outcome payments for a title XVI beneficiary, we considered an outcome
payment month to be one ``for which [a cash benefit under section 1611
and a cash benefit under section 1619(a)]
[[Page 67409]]
* * * are not payable to the individual because of work or earnings.''
Comment: Many commenters were concerned that proposed
Sec. 411.525(b) set the payment rate for the outcome-milestone payment
system at about 85 percent of what would be payable under the outcome
payment system for the same beneficiary. They said that this difference
was too great to attract small or specialized providers that do not
have the financial resources to pay for all of the up-front cost of
services. The commenters predicted that the difference would discourage
the use of the outcome-milestone payment system, impede the delivery of
services to those with more severe disabilities, and undermine the
Ticket to Work program's goal of increasing consumer choice.
The commenters recommended that we close the gap between the two
payment systems to create an incentive for as many providers as
possible to participate in the Ticket to Work program. Many suggested
that we narrow the gap to the bare minimum possible under the law; with
two commenters saying that a one dollar difference would meet the
letter of the law. Others suggested specific rate differentials ranging
from 95 to 99 percent.
Response: We did not adopt these commenters' suggestions to close
the gap between the two payment systems. We believe that if we close
the gap too much, there would be no incentive for ENs to choose the
outcome payment system and, by default, we would have one rather than
two EN payment systems, and that one system would be the outcome-
milestone payment system. Under the law, we are to offer providers two
EN payment systems and we are to make the outcome-milestone payment
system the less financially rewarding of the two. In return for the
opportunity to receive up-front milestone payments, providers choosing
the outcome-milestone payment system receive a smaller total potential
payment amount than under the outcome payment system. If there is not a
meaningful difference to the total payments available under the two
systems, all providers would choose the outcome-milestone payment
system because it offers payments earlier. Such a result could
jeopardize the success of the program as a whole because the outcome-
milestone payment system, by offering payments to providers before SSA
has achieved any program savings, increases the risk that government
outlays in the form of milestone payments will not be subsequently
offset with savings from the nonpayment of benefits. As we begin to
implement the Ticket to Work program, we will collect data and use it
to determine if we should continue to apply the same rate differential
between the two systems.
Comment: One commenter asked if an EN would be entitled to the
remainder of the 60 months of outcome payments if an individual dies or
turns age 65 first.
Response: No. In final Secs. 411.155(a) and 411.525(c) we state
that we will not pay an EN for milestone or outcomes achieved in or
after the month in which a beneficiary's ticket terminates. The events
that cause a ticket to terminate are listed in Sec. 411.155.
In all cases, death is an event that would cause a ticket to
terminate. It is a terminating event for benefit entitlement/
eligibility purposes, and thus is covered by the provisions in
Sec. 411.155(a)(1). Also, we refer to death in Sec. 411.155(c)(4) of
the final rules as a ticket-terminating event for those whose
entitlement/eligibility to disability benefits have ended/terminated
because of work or earnings.
In most cases, a beneficiary's ticket will also terminate when the
individual attains age 65 or, where appropriate, full retirement age.
Attaining full retirement age is a terminating event for workers who
are entitled to Social Security disability benefits, and thus is
covered by the provisions in Sec. 411.155(a)(1). We also refer to full
retirement age, or to age 65, in Sec. 411.155(a)(2), (a)(3), and (c)(3)
of the final rules as a ticket-terminating event.
The only instance in which attainment of age 65 or retirement age,
would not cause disability benefits, and hence the ticket, to terminate
is if the individual is still entitled to childhood disability
benefits. However, we will not pay an EN for any of the remainder of
the 60 months of the outcome payment period in such a case unless the
rules in Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(i) are met. They provide that an EN may
receive a monthly outcome payment only for months in which no benefits
are payable because of work or earnings.
Section 411.530 How Will the Outcome Payments Be Reduced When Paid
Under the Outcome-Milestone Payment System?
Comment: Many commenters were critical of our proposal in
Sec. 411.530 to reduce the first 12 outcome payments under the outcome-
milestone payment system by the total amount that we had already paid
for milestone payments. They said that such a short reduction period
would discourage smaller, less well-capitalized ENs from participating
in the Ticket to Work program. Referring to this proposal as ``back
loading,'' they noted that it would mean that the fifth year of monthly
outcome payments would be three times higher than the payments in the
first year. They were concerned that an EN might lose the bulk of the
payments available should a beneficiary leave them shortly after
beginning to work. The commenters recommended that we reduce all 60
outcome payments equally, rather than just the first 12 outcome
payments, to account for milestone payments already made.
Response: We agree with these comments and revised Sec. 411.530. In
the outcome-milestone payment system, we will reduce each outcome
payment that an EN receives by an amount equal to \1/60\th of the
milestone payments already made to that EN based on a ticket.
With regard to the commenters' concerns about the loss of payments
when a beneficiary leaves an EN shortly after beginning to work, an EN
may make a claim for payment for any future milestones or outcomes the
beneficiary achieves. Final Sec. 411.560 provides that payments can be
split among ENs which have had a beneficiary's ticket assigned to them.
Comment: Many commenters said that having milestones based on the
SGA threshold amount was an inappropriate standard for title II
beneficiaries who previously used up most or all of their trial work
period before getting their tickets. Their concern was that ENs might
not receive milestone payments if the beneficiaries reached the outcome
payment period before achieving any milestones.
Response: In response to this comment we are modifying final
Sec. 411.530 to make clear that under the outcome-milestone payment
system we will reduce only outcome payments based on the amount of
milestone payments an EN receives. If we do not make milestone payments
to an EN with respect to a particular ticket, we will not reduce the
EN's outcome payments.
This had been our intent when we proposed this rule, but we were
not clear on two points. First, we did not identify whose outcome
payments we would reduce when more than one EN receives outcome
payments based on the same ticket and one receives milestone payments
and the other does not. Our intent is to reduce the outcome payments of
the EN that actually receives the milestone payments. Second, the
proposed rules indicated that we would reduce outcome payments by
milestone payments already made. In the final rules we deleted the word
``already'' because
[[Page 67410]]
there may be situations in which we make a retroactive payment for a
milestone that a beneficiary achieved before the outcome payment period
began. In such a case, we will have to make an adjustment for any
outcome reductions we did not take before we made the retroactive
milestone payment, and we will reduce any future outcome payments by an
amount equal to \1/60\th of all milestone payments we made to that EN.
Section 411.535 What Are the Milestones for Which an EN Can Be Paid?
Comment: Many commenters suggested that we add one or more pre-
employment milestones to the outcome-milestone payment system we
proposed to ensure that ENs can provide adequate pre-employment
services to disability beneficiaries. Some suggested milestones at
specific times, for example, when ENs make vocational assessments, when
beneficiaries and ENs sign IWPs, when ENs purchase assistive devices
for beneficiaries, or when ENs place beneficiaries in jobs. Others
suggested that we make the milestones more flexible, for example, tie
them to a measurable goal in the IWP, such as the completion of an
educational goal or the acquisition of specified job skills.
These commenters were concerned about the two milestones we
proposed, the first of which would not occur until after beneficiaries
work for at least three months at the SGA threshold amount. They
believed these milestones would not occur early enough in the service
period and would not allow payment for the substantial early costs
incurred in providing individuals with significant disabilities the
necessary services that are directly related to achieving the goal of
permanent employment. While the commenters acknowledged that paying for
an employment outcome is a worthy goal, they said that we should have
balanced that goal against the ability to recruit and retain ENs. Most
small-to-mid sized ENs, they explained, simply do not have the capital
to wait, potentially, six months to a year or more to receive their
first payments from SSA, especially when one considers the staff time
and cost of pre-employment services required to serve individuals with
significant disabilities. They believe that the lack of a more flexible
and front-loaded outcome-milestone payment system may discourage
providers from participating and thereby significantly limit
beneficiary choice.
The commenters also said that the milestones were supposed to be a
method of risk sharing between SSA and providers, but that the two we
proposed would delay and otherwise limit cash flow and force ENs to
assume all of the risk. One community-based agency said it was unfair
of SSA to ask currently under-funded, community-based organizations to
accept yet another burden of providing services without compensation.
In a similar vein, a State agency expressed concern that since their
State funds many programs involving providers that could become ENs,
the milestones, as proposed, would have the effect of shifting up-front
funding costs to the State, unless and until the providers receive
Federal payments.
Response: We did not adopt any of the commenters' suggestions for
establishing pre-employment milestones. Our major concern with offering
them is that of projected costs. The events associated with pre-
employment milestones occur so early in the process of moving a
beneficiary to independence that we project a significant number of
beneficiaries who would achieve them would not eventually leave the
disability rolls because of work or earnings. Accordingly, there would
not be sufficient savings from the eventual nonpayment of benefits to
offset the initial cost outlays associated with having pre-employment
milestones. For this reason, we tied the milestones in these final
rules to beneficiary work activity, when there is an increased
likelihood of permanent employment and of achieving outcomes.
Comment: Many commenters urged us to add to and modify the post-
employment milestones we proposed. Among the suggestions we received
were those to link the milestones to length of job retention only
(e.g., three, six, and nine months), without regard to the amount
earned. Also, there were suggestions to have a milestone system that
steps up to the SGA threshold amount for the final payment because many
beneficiaries ease into their work and gradually increase their
earnings. Others suggested that we substitute the recently raised trial
work period amount (i.e. $530) for the higher SGA threshold amount
(i.e. $740 for those who are not statutorily blind and $1,240 for those
who are statutorily blind). In addition, we received suggestions to
have specific title XVI milestones based on a percentage of reduction
in cash benefits and to add a milestone for 12 months of employment at
the SGA dollar amount.
Response: In response to these comments we amended final
Sec. 411.535 to add two milestones to the two that we originally
proposed. The first additional milestone is met when the beneficiary
works for one calendar month and has gross earnings from employment (or
net earnings from self-employment) for that month that are more than
the SGA threshold amount. The other additional milestone, which is
actually the fourth milestone, is met when the beneficiary works for 12
calendar months within a 15-month period and has gross earnings from
employment (or net earnings from self-employment) for each of the 12
months that are more than the SGA threshold amount. In making these
changes, we renumbered the two milestones we originally proposed as the
second and third milestones. Also, we provide that any of the work
months used to meet the first, second, or third milestones may be used
to meet a subsequent milestone.
We do not anticipate that the changes we are making to the
milestones in these final rules will be the only ones that we will
make. Section 1148(h)(5)(B) of the Act directs us to periodically
review the number and amount of the milestone payments, and authorizes
us to make alterations, if necessary, to ensure that they allow for
adequate incentives for ENs to serve beneficiaries with disabilities.
Thus, as we begin to implement the Ticket to Work program in the 13
initial States, we will continue to consider the various suggestions
that we received with regard to milestone payments.
At this time, however, we do not support the recommendations for a
milestone system based solely on length of job retention or on lower
levels of earnings so that beneficiaries can ease into their work.
While length of job retention can be an important factor in determining
whether benefits continue, so is the level of earnings, and we believe
that that level ought to at least exceed the SGA threshold amount. This
amount is a gross dollar amount, not the net earnings that remain after
we deduct the various employment supports an individual may receive.
Also, we do not favor the recommendations to structure SSI milestones
on a percentage of reduction in cash benefits. Many factors (e.g.,
unearned income and impairment-related work expenses, to name a few) go
into making SSI payment decisions. Thus, it would be difficult to know
whether a given percentage reduction in cash benefits is due to work or
to other factors, such as unearned income, without carefully examining
each SSI payment calculation.
Comment: A few commenters urged us to build incentives into the EN
payment systems to reward ENs for each additional client they move into
the workforce and for each client they help
[[Page 67411]]
to get better jobs, i.e. jobs that include benefits and provide a
livable wage. Along these lines, many commenters urged us to adopt
milestones provisions that would encourage ENs to serve those who need
more costly or more extensive services to become work ready. Some
suggested that we have individualized milestone criteria for those who
need ongoing support services or high-cost accommodations when working,
earn subminimum wages, or work but still receive partial cash benefits
(e.g., section 1619(a) recipients). Other commenters suggested that we
adopt a two-tiered milestone system like the ones used by some States
that administer supported employment programs. Under such a system
those in the second tier would get customized milestones when, due to
the nature of their disabilities, the pre-defined milestones in tier
one are unworkable. In addition, many suggested that we consult with
providers who have experience in milestone payment systems and redesign
our system.
Response: We did not adopt these recommendations because it is
impracticable for us to implement them at this time, given the size of
the ticket population and its diversity. Like these commenters, we want
the design of our EN payment systems to increase the number of ENs
serving our beneficiaries. However, we have a responsibility to see
that our expenditures under the program do not exceed program savings.
As we gather experiential data, we will carefully look at who is being
served and what design changes we can propose to broaden the number of
beneficiaries being served and increase the number of those finding
employment that will firmly establish their self-sufficiency. We will
consult with experts in the field, as needed, and consider the effects
of these suggestions in terms of beneficiary needs, program operations,
and costs. Further, section 1148(h)(5)(C) of the Act requires us to
submit a report to Congress on the adequacy of the incentives in the
Ticket to Work program for four groups of individuals. They are those
with a need for ongoing support and services, those with a need for
high-cost accommodations, those who earn a subminimum wage, and those
who work and receive partial cash benefits.
Section 411.540 What Are the Payment Amounts for Each of the
Milestones?
Comment: Many commenters told us that the payments we proposed to
offer as milestones (i.e. approximately 10 percent of potential
payments under the outcome-milestone payment system) are inadequate and
urged us to increase the amounts so as to encourage more small-to-mid-
sized providers to participate in the Ticket to Work program. Some of
these commenters suggested that we use a graduated fee system and pay
based on the level of earnings a beneficiary receives. Others suggested
that we base the milestone payments on a percentage of the true cost of
services an EN provides. Still others suggested that we allow the PM to
negotiate a fixed fee with each EN. We also received many
recommendations for specific fees as well as many recommendations for a
total package of milestone payments that ranged from $3,500 to $7,500.
Response: We agree with the commenters that some increase in the
total milestone package would help to encourage more providers to serve
as ENs. Therefore, in these final rules, we doubled the total value of
the milestones that ENs may receive to approximately 20 percent of the
potential payments possible under the outcome-milestone payment system.
In terms of the 2001 payment amounts this equates to milestone payments
totaling $3,096 for title II (including concurrent) beneficiaries and
$1,874 for title XVI only beneficiaries.
To accomplish this increase in the milestone payments, we modified
final Sec. 411.540. We provided that the two milestones we added--the
first and fourth milestones--would equal 34 percent and 170 percent of
the payment calculation base for the calendar year in which each
occurs. This represents approximately 10 percent of the potential
payments possible under the outcome-milestone payment system. In
addition, in final paragraphs (e) and (h) we explain the term ``month
of attainment'' for the new milestones.
We do not believe that it is administratively practicable to adopt
a graduated fee system, to set individual fees, or to have the PM
negotiate fees with each EN. Also, we believe a $7,500 milestone
package is excessive when there is no guarantee that individuals who
achieve milestones will also achieve outcomes that result in program
savings.
Section 411.545 What Are the Payment Amounts for Outcome Payment
Months Under the Outcome-Milestone Payment System?
Comment: Several commenters suggested that we offer a flat payment
rate for outcome months under the outcome-milestone payment system.
They found the graduated monthly outcome payments we proposed in
Sec. 411.545 to be unnecessarily complex and predicted they would be
more difficult to manage.
Response: We have adopted this suggested change and have modified
the rules. Final Sec. 411.545 provides that the payment for an outcome
payment month under the outcome-milestone payment system is equal to 34
percent of the payment calculation base for the calendar year in which
the month occurs, rounded to the nearest whole dollar, and reduced for
milestone payments made, as required by the rules in Sec. 411.530.
Section 411.555 Can the EN Keep the Milestone and Outcome Payments
Even if the Beneficiary Does Not Achieve All 60 Outcome Months?
Comment: One commenter asked whether an EN would be responsible for
paying back any payments it receives if a beneficiary stops working and
goes back on the benefit rolls.
Response: An EN may keep each milestone or outcome payment for
which the EN is eligible, even if the beneficiary subsequently stops
working and returns to the benefit rolls. In some instances, however,
we may find it necessary to adjust a milestone or outcome payment that
the EN receives.
In proposed Sec. 411.555, by reference to proposed Sec. 411.560, we
provided for such adjustment when another EN, to which the beneficiary
assigned the ticket, requests payment for the same milestone or
outcome. As we drafted these final rules, we realized that there may be
other instances in which an adjustment may be necessary, and thus we
expanded final Sec. 411.555, to explain these other instances.
Paragraph (a) of final Sec. 411.555 provides a general statement
that ENs may keep those milestone and outcome payments for which they
are eligible. Paragraph (b) of final Sec. 411.555 discusses the EN
payment adjustments we may make if we determine that we paid more or
less than the correct amount due. This paragraph also provides two
examples of situations requiring such an adjustment. One example refers
to the aforementioned adjustments for payment allocations required by
Sec. 411.560. The other is an example of an adjustment described in
Sec. 411.590(d) that results from a corresponding determination or
decision that we make about a beneficiary's right to benefits. Finally,
paragraph (c) of final Sec. 411.555 explains that we will notify ENs of
any revised payment decisions. It also references our payment dispute
rules in Sec. 411.590(a) and (b).
[[Page 67412]]
Section 411.560 Is It Possible To Pay a Milestone or Outcome Payment
to More Than One EN?
Comment: We received two comments about the consequences of a
beneficiary reassigning the ticket to another EN. One commenter said
that the proposed rules were not clear with regard to whether we would
pay the first EN. The other commenter was concerned with the
repercussions of expecting ENs to absorb the cost of the resources
expended on those who reassign their tickets. This commenter predicted
that concern over beneficiaries reassigning a ticket would cause some
providers to decline to participate in the Ticket to Work program, and
others who decide to be ENs would serve only those beneficiaries with
the greatest potential for success in the timeliest fashion.
Response: We can pay an EN after a beneficiary reassigns the ticket
to another EN. Final Sec. 411.560 states we can pay more than one EN
and the PM will determine how much to allocate to each EN based upon
the services provided. Additionally, final Sec. 411.565 provides that
if two or more ENs qualify for payment on the same ticket, we will pay
each according to its elected EN payment system.
If we receive a claim from one EN that we determine is payable, we
will make a reasonable attempt to notify any other EN that has held the
beneficiary's ticket and still has an agreement with us to serve under
the program of its opportunity to claim a share of the payment.
Similarly, if we receive a claim from the beneficiary's current EN that
we determine is payable, we also will make a reasonable attempt to
notify any State VR agency that previously held the beneficiary's
ticket and had chosen to be paid as an EN based on that ticket, of the
opportunity to claim a share of the payment.
Comment: A few commenters suggested that we provide additional
rules to further define the provisions of proposed Sec. 411.560
regarding how the PM will determine payment allocation to more than one
EN. These commenters were concerned that the Ticket to Work program is
intended to pay ENs based on employment outcomes and the last sentence
in this proposed section said that the PM would make payment
allocations based ``upon the services provided by each EN.''
Response: We agree that the proposed wording was unclear. The
fourth sentence of final Sec. 411.560 now says that the PM will base
the payment allocation determination upon the contribution of the
services provided by each EN toward the achievement of the outcomes or
milestones. In addition, we added a fifth sentence to the final rules
to clarify that outcome and milestone payments will not be increased
because the payments are shared between two or more ENs.
Section 411.570 Can an EN Request Payment From the Beneficiary Who
Assigned a Ticket to the EN?
Comment: One commenter questioned the use of the term
``compensation'' in proposed Sec. 411.570. This section prohibits an EN
from requesting or receiving compensation from the beneficiary for the
services it provides. The commenter hoped that this section would not
prevent a beneficiary from purchasing items at any retail establishment
the EN may operate just because the EN holds the beneficiary's ticket.
Response: We believe that in the context of these regulations it is
clear that the EN may not charge a beneficiary for the employment,
vocational rehabilitation, or support services it provides. This
regulation does not prohibit a beneficiary from purchasing items
unrelated to the services the EN is providing to the beneficiary in any
retail establishment the EN may have.
Comment: One commenter asked whether an EN could receive funding
from another agency, other than a State VR agency, while serving a
beneficiary with a ticket.
Response: ENs may receive funding elsewhere. Other than payments we
will make to ENs, the Ticket to Work program does not address how ENs
are funded.
Section 411.575 How Does the EN Request Payment for Milestones or
Outcome Payment Months Achieved by a Beneficiary Who Assigned a Ticket
to the EN?
Comment: Many commenters objected to the rules in proposed
Sec. 411.575(b)(2) that would require ENs to submit evidence of
beneficiary earnings when they request outcome payments because the
commenters believe that the task of tracking such earnings is the
Social Security Administration's responsibility. Some commenters simply
recommended that we not involve ENs in the process. Others recommended
that we partner with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to develop a
reliable means of receiving earnings information. Still others
recommended that we assign the PM the responsibility of acquiring and
validating earnings documentation from IRS or another source. There
were also suggestions to use the earnings data posted to our own
earnings records and the earnings information which working
beneficiaries are required to report to us.
Response: We did not adopt these suggestions. Our goal in proposing
that ENs submit evidence of monthly beneficiary earnings in order to
receive outcome payments was to facilitate the EN payment process.
Under the Ticket to Work program, we cannot make outcome payments for
any month for which a beneficiary receives a Federal cash disability
payment from us. Accurately and expeditiously tracking earnings and
adjusting monthly benefits is a difficult task. Beneficiaries are
responsible for telling us when work occurs. For various reasons, this
does not always happen, or does not happen on a timely basis. We
currently use earnings reports that we receive from the IRS and other
sources to alert us to unreported earnings situations. However, the
reports we get can be a year old, are in annual or quarterly formats,
and are not always primary sources of earnings. As a result, we must
undertake extensive development to verify monthly earnings and
employment supports before adjusting benefits. Thus, we continue to
believe that ENs, which will be working with and helping beneficiaries
get and retain employment, will be able to supply documentation of
earnings and this will speed up the benefit adjustment, and hence, the
EN payment process.
Comment: Some commenters suggested that rather than requiring ENs
to submit evidence of earnings, we develop a system or mechanism to
notify ENs when a beneficiary's disability benefits stop. Then, ENs
will know when to file requests for outcome payments.
Response: We did not adopt this suggestion. We do not presently
have the systems interface capability to automatically notify ENs when
a beneficiary's benefits stop on account of work or earnings. Further,
based on the rules in Secs. 411.525(a)(1)(ii)(A) and
411.575(b)(1)(i)(B), once an individual's entitlement to Social
Security disability benefits ends or eligibility for SSI benefits based
on disability or blindness terminates because of work or earnings, we
still need evidence that the individual had gross earnings in a month
that are more than the SGA threshold amount in order to make an outcome
payment.
Comment: Many commenters, representing both large and small service
providers, objected to the provisions in proposed Sec. 411.575(b)(2),
(b)(4), and (b)(5) that would require ENs to submit evidence of
beneficiary earnings on a monthly or bimonthly basis. They said that
the proposed rules
[[Page 67413]]
were complex, expensive, and excessively burdensome on both ENs and
employers. Also, many predicted that the rules would deter providers
from participating in the Ticket to Work program.
The commenters expressed concern with the costs and feasibility of
establishing a tracking system that could monitor the monthly earnings
of multiple beneficiaries over an extended period of time, especially
when beneficiaries switch employers, are not continuously employed, or
move to areas the EN does not serve. Some commenters also said that ENs
would not be able to obtain monthly earnings information on an ongoing
basis from those who assign their tickets to other ENs, achieve
independent employment, or leave the disability rolls and no longer
have an incentive to cooperate with their EN. Even commenters who said
that they presently have access to State records of employment wages
pointed out that such records would not be a good source of evidence
under our proposed rules. That is because these are quarterly, not
monthly, wage reports, and they can be over a year old. Another
commenter said that the proposed requirement to report earnings at
least every two months would be difficult for State VR agencies,
especially once they close a beneficiary's case.
Many commenters suggested that we allow ENs to submit evidence of
quarterly, rather than monthly, earnings and to do so on a quarterly or
semi-annual basis, as opposed to a monthly or bimonthly basis. There
were also suggestions to pay ENs in the event that ticket holders do
not provide the needed earnings information and to assist ENs in
documenting earnings when beneficiaries reassign their tickets to other
ENs.
Response: In response to these comments, we consolidated the
earnings documentation requirements for outcome payments into one
paragraph and made two changes. First, final Sec. 411.575(b)(2) now
requires ENs to submit their payment requests, along with evidence of
beneficiary work or earnings, on at least a quarterly basis. Second,
this paragraph includes an exception to this general rule to provide
for those situations in which the ticket is no longer assigned to the
EN that files the request for payment. In such cases, the EN is not
required to submit evidence of beneficiary work or earnings, although
of course any evidence submitted in these cases will help to expedite
our processing of the payment request.
Comment: One commenter said that we should not place a mandatory
earnings-reporting requirement on ENs. Instead, this commenter
suggested that we require ENs to request a time-limited release for
earnings information from each beneficiary. Then, if the beneficiary
signs the release, we should require the EN to report earnings
information to us, to the extent that the beneficiary continues to
cooperate with the EN.
Response: We did not adopt this suggestion. We believe that the
method ENs use to collect earnings information from beneficiaries does
not need to be regulated by us. Rather, it is something that both
parties should discuss and reach an agreement on before the ticket is
assigned. For example, they may decide to reference the agreed-to
collection method in the IWP.
Comment: Commenters were concerned that the second sentence of
proposed Sec. 411.575(b)(2) was burdensome. It would require ENs to
submit ``sufficient'' proof of work or earnings for us to determine
whether we can stop the beneficiary's monthly Federal cash benefits due
to work or earnings. One of these commenters pointed out that this
sentence was inconsistent with how we actually evaluate a beneficiary's
work or earnings because there was no mention of our work incentive
provisions. For example, payroll records may show ``sufficient''
earnings to stop benefits, but we may decide to continue benefits
because a beneficiary is in a trial work period, has an impairment
related work expense or a plan for achieving self-support, or receives
a subsidy.
Response: We agree with the commenters and removed this sentence
from final Sec. 411.575(b)(2).
Comment: Many commenters were concerned with the last sentence in
proposed Sec. 411.575(b)(2). It stated that wage evidence for employees
is ``best obtained from the employer or the employer's designated
payroll preparer.'' Some commenters said that this sentence poses
significant confidentiality issues, especially for beneficiaries who
have not disclosed their disability to their employers. Two commenters
noted that an EN could just as easily obtain this same information from
the beneficiary's pay stubs and one of these commenters suggested that
we permit ENs to submit photocopied, as opposed to original, pay stubs.
Another commenter said the information could be retrieved from State
wage records, and one commenter suggested we allow for the use of
Unemployment Insurance wage records. In addition to these comments,
many said that having ENs collect earnings information from any source
might violate the right of beneficiaries to keep such information
confidential and private from ENs, if they so choose.
Some of these commenters recommended that we specify what other
types of earnings documentation we would consider acceptable and
indicate where ENs could obtain them. One commenter suggested that we
allow for the use of payroll records retrieved from State taxation
departments.
Response: In response to these comments, we included two additional
examples of the types of evidence that ENs may submit with their
payment requests in the second sentence of final Sec. 411.575(b)(2).
They are an unaltered copy of the beneficiary's pay stub and an
unaltered copy of the beneficiary's estimated tax return if self-
employed. These are not the only sources of evidence we will accept,
and the PM, in its EN training material, will discuss what other types
of evidence that ENs may submit.
We retained the example of a statement from the employer or the
employer's designated payroll preparer because we consider this
evidence to be of high probative value. However, we would not expect an
EN to request this information or, for that matter, an employer to
provide it without a beneficiary's signed consent.
Comment: With respect to proposed Sec. 411.575, one commenter asked
how an EN's ability to collect payments would be affected by a delay in
our stopping disability benefits to a working beneficiary.
Response: In most situations, an EN's eligibility for a payment
will depend on SSA's determination about a beneficiary's right to
payment. Briefly, there are three different payment scenarios, two of
which are related to outcome payments, and the other concerns milestone
payments.
The first scenario relates to when we are asked to make an
outcome payment under either the outcome payment system or the outcome-
milestone payment system while the beneficiary is still entitled under
title II or eligible under title XVI. (It is possible for a beneficiary
to be entitled or eligible, but to not receive cash benefits.) Before
we can make an outcome payment to the EN, we must determine whether the
payment of Social Security disability benefits and Federal SSI cash
benefits to an otherwise entitled or eligible beneficiary is precluded
because of work or earnings.
The second payment scenario relates to when we are asked
to make
[[Page 67414]]
payment to an EN in connection with an individual whose entitlement or
eligibility for disability benefits has terminated due to work or
earnings. In such a situation, payment to an EN will depend on whether
the individual has earnings for a month that meet the earnings
requirements in Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(ii)(A), and whether the requirement
in Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(ii)(B) is satisfied.
The third payment scenario involves an EN's request for a
milestone payment. Our determination regarding a milestone payment will
depend on whether the requirements concerning duration of work and
level of earnings for attainment of a particular milestone are met and
whether attainment of the milestone occurs before the start of the
individual's outcome payment period. As noted in Sec. 411.500(b), the
outcome payment period begins with the first month, ending after the
date on which the ticket was first assigned, for which Social Security
disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits are not payable to
the individual due to work or earnings. If the start of the outcome
payment period is an issue with regard to a request for a milestone
payment, then we may have to make a determination about a beneficiary's
right to payment.
Comment: We received suggestions not to recover any overpayments to
ENs or beneficiaries that result from the earnings reporting system we
use and a suggestion to provide for a specific payment time frame to
ensure ENs of prompt payment following the submission of accurately
documented payment claims. Along similar lines, many commenters
suggested that SSA institute a 90-day payment processing rule. Under
such a rule, the PM would have 30 days to submit EN reported earnings
to us and then SSA would have 60 days to stop or adjust a beneficiary's
check. Should we fail to stop or adjust benefits within this time
frame, these commenters recommended that we pay the EN's claim
immediately, as though benefits had stopped, and not hold the
beneficiary liable for any overpayment.
Response: We did not adopt the suggestions to not recover or not
hold beneficiaries liable for overpayments because, except in the case
of milestone payments, the statute does not allow us to pay an EN and
the beneficiary for the same month. Therefore, in order for us to pay
one party, we must recover any overpayments we may have made to the
other party.
Also, we did not incorporate any payment time frames into these
final rules. The earnings documentation that ENs submit will help us to
make more timely decisions. However, we must still develop all relevant
issues and adhere to strict due process guidelines before we adjust or
stop a beneficiary's benefits. Additionally, in SSI cases, we must
offer to continue benefits should a beneficiary appeal our
determination to stop benefits.
Comment: Two commenters discussed the outcome payment system and
how a beneficiary's use of work incentive provisions such as plan for
achieving self-support (PASS) and impairment-related work expenses
(IRWE) could prevent some ENs from getting paid. Their concern was that
those beneficiaries with more intensive service needs would not be
served. One of these commenters said that ENs might not fully disclose
or explain to beneficiaries that beneficiaries have these other work
incentives available, and that ENs may rush beneficiaries to benefit
suspension, in order to generate outcome payments for the EN.
Response: We hope that all beneficiaries who want to work will
receive services, and that, when they begin to work, they will avail
themselves fully of all of the various work incentive provisions of the
Act. We will monitor any complaints about ENs discouraging
beneficiaries from using the work incentive provisions. In addition, to
eliminate any possibility of a conflict of interest, in these final
rules we deleted the provision in proposed Sec. 411.575(b)(3) that
encouraged ENs to submit beneficiary-completed Work Activity Reports
(Form SSA-821s) with their requests for outcome payments. Usually,
Social Security field personnel request beneficiaries to complete and
return this form when work activity is reported and assist
beneficiaries when needed. We originally thought it would speed our
determinations about work or earnings if ENs obtained this form and
submitted it to us with their payment requests. However, the form
contains questions about special working conditions and payments and
impairment-related work expenses. In light of these comments, we
believe the beneficiaries should obtain the form from Social Security
field personnel, and should complete it with their assistance, not the
EN's.
Beneficiaries have many sources of information about our other work
incentives such as PASS and IRWE. Section 1149 of the Act, as added by
section 121 of Public Law 106-170, requires that SSA establish a corps
of work incentives specialists within SSA who will specialize in
disability work incentives and who will disseminate accurate
information on work incentives to disability beneficiaries and to
benefit applicants. We have created a new position called the
employment support representative to fulfill this requirement to create
a corps of work incentives specialists. These specialists will also
assist organizations awarded funds by SSA to provide information about
work incentives.
Section 1149 of the Act requires us to establish a program of
grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts for State or private
agencies or organizations to provide benefits planning and assistance
to beneficiaries with disabilities. Under this program, we have awarded
funds to organizations in every State and U.S. territory in order to
disseminate accurate information about the various work incentives
provisions available to title II and title XVI disability
beneficiaries. The organizations receiving funds from SSA will provide
information, guidance, and planning to beneficiaries with disabilities
on the availability and interrelation of Federal and State work
incentives programs, on health coverage, and on the availability of
protection and advocacy services and how to access such services.
Under a program authorized by section 1150 of the Act, we are
awarding grants to State protection and advocacy systems in every
State, in the District of Columbia, in five U.S. territories, and to
the protection and advocacy system for Native Americans. These grants
will allow the protection and advocacy systems to assist beneficiaries
with disabilities in obtaining information and advice about receiving
vocational rehabilitation and employment services, as well as advocacy
and other services that a disabled beneficiary may need to secure or
regain gainful employment.
We believe that these programs and our efforts will ensure that
disability beneficiaries are more fully informed about all of the work
incentives provisions available to them.
Comment: One commenter asked about the consequences for an EN if we
deny an EN's claim for payment due to inaccurate wage information or
other reasons.
Response: Generally, the only consequence is that the claim will be
denied and the EN will not receive payment. However, if we believe that
the issue of inaccurate wage reporting involves the possibility of
fraud, we will investigate the issue fully and take appropriate action.
Of course, if an EN disagrees with our decision on a payment
request, we will follow the rules in Sec. 411.590(a) to resolve the
dispute. Similarly, if a State VR agency, serving a beneficiary as an
EN, disagrees with our decision on a
[[Page 67415]]
payment request under an EN payment system, we will follow the rules in
Sec. 411.590(b) to resolve the dispute.
Section 411.585 Can a State VR Agency and an EN Both Receive Payment
for Serving the Same Beneficiary?
Comment: One commenter, referring to the introductory text of
proposed Sec. 411.585, suggested that the final rules provide guidance
on how a shared payment to an EN and a State VR agency that decides to
serve a beneficiary as an EN would be calculated.
Response: We amended the introductory text of final Sec. 411.585 to
provide a cross-reference to final Sec. 411.560, which explains how a
PM will make a shared payment EN determination.
Comment: We received a number of comments, from both inside and
outside of the State VR system, about the proposal in Sec. 411.585 (a)
and (b) to preclude payment under one of the EN payment systems if a
State VR agency first receives payment under the cost reimbursement
payment system, and vice-versa. Several of these commenters questioned
the legal basis for this provision. They said that they found nothing
in the legislative history or statute that would prohibit payments
under both systems. Further, they argued that our proposal would negate
beneficiary choice and ultimately harm those with significant
disabilities who could benefit from services under both the VR cost
reimbursement and EN payment systems.
Some of the commenters also said that our proposal seems to assume
that the EN payment systems and the cost reimbursement payment system
pay for identical services. Their interpretation of the EN payment
systems is that they provide for long-term supports that help
beneficiaries maintain productive employment over 60 months. These
commenters view the cost reimbursement payment system as one that
allows State VR agencies to close cases after 90 days of employment and
collect payment when beneficiaries achieve a continuous 9-month period
of SGA.
Those who commented on Sec. 411.585 recommended that we revise it.
They believe that the Ticket to Work program should accommodate both
the EN and the cost reimbursement payments systems for serving the same
beneficiary.
Response: We did not revise final Sec. 411.585 to allow for payment
with respect to a ticket under both the traditional cost reimbursement
system and an EN payment system because we believe to do so would be
contrary to how we believe Congress intended for the two programs to
operate together, and to do so could undermine the Ticket to Work
program's goal of realizing program savings while moving beneficiaries
to independence. The first two sentences of section 1148(c)(1) of the
Act provide State VR agencies with the option of electing to
participate in the Ticket to Work program as an EN with respect to a
beneficiary. The third sentence of section 1148(c)(1) of the Act allows
State VR agencies the additional option of choosing, on a case-by-case
basis, to be paid under the cost reimbursement payment system when
serving a beneficiary with a ticket. Had Congress intended to allow for
payments under both the cost reimbursement payment system and the EN
payment systems with respect to the same individual with a ticket,
there would have been no need for the third sentence of 1148(c)(1). The
authority to reimburse State VR agencies under the cost reimbursement
payment system already existed under sections 222(d) and 1615(d) and
(e) of the Act. We believe that Congress included the third sentence in
section 1148(c)(1) of the Act to make the securing of services by a
beneficiary with a ticket from a State VR agency electing cost
reimbursement a mutually exclusive alternative to a beneficiary's
obtaining services from an EN. This view of section 1148(c)(1) of the
Act is shared by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in the cost
estimates it submitted to the Senate Committee on Finance (Senate
Report No. 106-37, March 26, 1999, page 41) and the House Committee on
Commerce (House Report No. 106-220, July 1, 1999, page 19). In their
reports the CBO stated that the Ticket to Work program would
``partially displace the current'' cost reimbursement program.
Another provision of the enabling legislation that supports our
regulatory limitation on payments in Sec. 411.585 is section 1148(e)(3)
of the Act. It provides that a beneficiary may change ENs without being
deemed to have rejected services under the Ticket to Work program;
that, when such a change occurs, the PM shall reassign the ticket based
on the choice of the beneficiary; and that, ``[u]pon the request of the
employment network, the program manager shall make a determination of
the allocation of the outcome or milestone-outcome payments based on
the services provided by each employment network.'' These provisions do
not contemplate a beneficiary switching providers or having SSA or the
PM allocate payments among providers in a case where one of the
providers is a State VR agency that has chosen to be paid under the
cost reimbursement payment system.
Section 1148(h) of the Act also supports the regulatory limitation
on payments in Sec. 411.585. This section limits the total number of
outcome payments that we can make on a ticket under either EN payment
system to 60 payments. Once this limit is reached, the ticket ceases to
have any further value for purposes of making payments under either EN
payment system. Since the third sentence of section 1148(c)(1) of the
Act gives State VR agencies the option of being paid under the cost
reimbursement payment system instead of being paid under one of the EN
payment systems (not in addition to being paid under the EN payment
systems), we believe that once we pay a State VR agency under this
system for having served a beneficiary, the ticket ceases to have value
for purposes of making payments thereafter under either EN payment
system.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the rules in
Sec. 411.585 did not address how State VR agencies would be paid for
the cost of the services they provide to beneficiaries whose tickets
are held by an EN. On one hand the State VR agencies cannot limit the
services they provide to eligible individuals. On the other hand, an EN
that holds the ticket of a beneficiary who requires expensive
technological services to work could not be expected to reimburse a
State VR agency for the cost of such services from the monies the EN
would receive under the Ticket to Work program.
Response: The authorizing legislation of the Ticket to Work program
does not give us the authority to decide how or whether State VR
agencies will be reimbursed by ENs for the services they provide to
beneficiaries whose tickets are held by ENs. Section 1148(c)(3) of the
Act provides that State VR agencies shall enter into agreements
regarding the conditions under which services will be provided when an
individual is referred by an EN to a State VR agency for services. Our
rules in Sec. 411.400 through 411.435 address the agreements between
State VR agencies and EN and how disputes will be resolved.
Comment: Some commenters expressed concern that the provisions in
Sec. 411.585 could lead to abuses should ENs actively recruit
beneficiaries who are near the end of their employment plans after
State VR agencies have put substantial resources into serving them.
Response: We understand these concerns, however, we believe that
State
[[Page 67416]]
VR agencies and ENs will use the provisions in the Ticket to Work
program to work together to serve our beneficiaries in ways that give
the beneficiaries expanded access to employment, vocational
rehabilitation, and support services. We will make every effort to
ensure that beneficiaries can make informed choices about the providers
available to them, the nature of the services they offer, and how a
provider's payment system election may affect the beneficiary's future
use of the ticket.
Comment: One commenter suggested that we make provision for State
VR agencies to share their cost reimbursement payments with ENs, with
the PM resolving any disputes.
Response: We do not have the statutory authority to adopt this
suggestion. Section 1148(e)(3) of the Act provides for the PM to make
determinations about allocating outcome and milestone payments.
However, there is no similar provision for allocating cost
reimbursement payments between a State VR agency and an EN that serve
the same beneficiary.
Section 411.587 Which Provider Will SSA Pay if, With Respect to the
Same Ticket, SSA Receives a Request for Payment From an EN or a State
VR Agency That Elected Payment Under an EN Payment System and a Request
for Payment From a State VR Agency That Elected Payment Under the Cost
Reimbursement Payment System?
Comment: One commenter suggested that, if we did not revise
Sec. 411.585 to allow for payment under both the cost reimbursement and
the EN payment systems with respect to the same ticket, we specify the
criteria we would use when deciding which provider to pay.
Response: In response to this comment, we added Sec. 411.587 to
these final rules. This section clarifies which provider we will pay
if, with respect to the same ticket, we receive a request for payment
from a provider that elected an EN payment system and one from a State
VR agency that elected the cost reimbursement payment system. Paragraph
(a) of Sec. 411.587 explains that we will pay the claim of the provider
that first meets the requirements for payment under its elected payment
system applicable to the beneficiary who assigned the ticket. Paragraph
(b) of this section explains which provider we will pay should both
meet the payment requirements in the same month. In such a case, we
will pay the claim of the provider to which the beneficiary's ticket is
currently assigned. If the ticket is not currently assigned to either
provider, we will pay the claim of the provider to which the ticket was
most recently assigned.
Section 411.590 What Can an EN Do if the EN Disagrees With Our
Decision on a Payment Request?
Comment: Many commenters found two issues troubling in proposed
Sec. 411.590(d) concerning what an EN can do if it disagrees with a
revised determination which we make about a beneficiary's right to
benefits following a beneficiary's appeal of a determination which is
unfavorable to the beneficiary and which affects the beneficiary's
entitlement, eligibility, or right to a benefit payment. First,
commenters believed that the proposed section highlights the
possibility of an EN having to return payments following a
beneficiary's successful appeal, which the commenters said would act as
a disincentive for providers to serve as ENs. Second, they disliked the
provision which permits an EN to furnish any evidence it has which may
be relevant to the beneficiary's appeal. The commenters said this rule
would create an adversarial situation and harm the relationship between
beneficiaries and ENs.
Response: We understand the concerns that these commenters have
about the disability determination and payment process and resulting
effect it can have on the EN payment process. That is why we decided to
refer to this process, which we call the administrative review process,
in proposed Sec. 411.590(d). Also, we do not want the process to create
an adversarial relationship between beneficiaries and ENs. That is why
we clearly state in Sec. 411.590(c) and (d) that an EN cannot appeal a
determination we make about a beneficiary's right to benefits, but they
may furnish evidence in support of their claims for payment.
Sections 404.900 et seq. and 416.1400 et seq. explain the
administrative review process we have under title II and title XVI of
the Act. Determinations we make about a beneficiary's right to
disability cash benefits are administrative actions that are subject to
review. Generally, if beneficiaries are dissatisfied with a
determination we make, they have a 60-day period in which to request
further administrative review, and ultimately court review.
Additionally, if they do not request a review within these time frames,
they may request that we reopen and revise a determination we
previously made about a beneficiary's right to cash benefits, or we may
decide to this on our own initiative. Since the EN payment systems are
inherently linked to the determinations we make about a beneficiary's
right to cash benefits, there will be situations in which we make,
amend, or otherwise revise a determination relating to a beneficiary's
right to cash benefits, and that determination will result in an EN
having to return a payment we previously made to them. However, we are
hopeful that our efforts to educate beneficiaries and ENs about the
various employment support provisions in the Act and to remind them of
their reporting responsibilities will increase understanding of how
work may affect a beneficiary's right to cash benefits, which in turn
will help us to minimize the number of instances in which we must
revise EN payment decisions.
As we reviewed the provisions we proposed to respond to these
comments, we realized that the rules we proposed in Sec. 411.590(d) did
not cover all of the possible administrative actions that we might make
about a beneficiary's right to disability cash benefits. Therefore, we
reorganized and broadened the language in the final rules so that they
refer to all determinations we may make about a beneficiary's right to
benefits, not just those determinations that a beneficiary may appeal.
In addition, we referenced our rules in Sec. 411.555 concerning the
adjustment of EN payments when we determine we paid more or less than
the correct amount.
Section 411.597 Will SSA Periodically Review the Outcome Payment
System and the Outcome-Milestone Payment System for Possible
Modifications?
Comment: Many commenters suggested that we initiate, as soon as
possible, the research needed for the Report on the Adequacy of the
Incentives provided in the Ticket to Work program, as required by
section 1148(h)(5)(C) of the Act. They said that they had identified
the report as a key initiative to assure that those with severe
disabilities are able to participate fully in the Ticket to Work
program. Thus, they urged us to begin collecting the information as
soon as possible and suggested that we collect data on matters such as
the reasons ENs decline to offer services to one or more groups of the
four groups specifically identified in the law.
Response: We agree with the commenters that the information
gathered for this report will play a key role in the development of
future policies and proposals for possible legislative changes to
assist beneficiaries participate more fully in the Ticket to Work
program. As soon as the Ticket to Work program is operational, we will
begin collecting data on all four groups mentioned in the statute,
including data
[[Page 67417]]
on the reasons ENs may decline to serve them.
Comment: Many commenters suggested that we use our demonstration
authority to test various payment options and funding schemes in the
initial rollout States. Some recommended that we test three or four
varying milestone and payment amounts to determine which would best
attract appropriate ENs for hard to serve populations. One specific
recommendation was that we test offering outcome payments for reduced
cash benefits when, due to the nature of a beneficiary's condition, the
beneficiary can achieve only lower levels of employment. Another
recommendation was that we test making outcome and milestone payments
richer for cases involving SSI beneficiaries and encourage States to
contribute a portion of the saved SSI State supplementation payment. In
addition, there was a suggestion to test up-front capitalization
funding via matching Federal and State dollars.
Response: We will consider all of these interesting demonstration
ideas as we continue to explore the best ways to serve beneficiaries
with disabilities and reduce their barriers to work and self-
sufficiency.
Subpart I--Ticket to Work Program Dispute Resolution
Public comments on subpart I of the proposed rules raised a number
of issues relating to the dispute resolution processes. An overall
theme in the comments was that review and appeal mechanisms should be
more elaborate than required by the legislation. The Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), provides a process for
resolution of disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are State VR
agencies. The Commissioner has developed a different 3-step process for
resolving disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are not State VR
agencies.
The rules for this 3-step dispute resolution process provide common
sense guidelines that give both parties to the dispute several
opportunities to be heard. The rules permit disputants to resolve
quickly, easily, and fairly issues that arise between them. The 3-step
dispute resolution process for resolving disputes between beneficiaries
and ENs that are not State VR agencies affords a full and fair review
of issues in dispute. A discussion of specific issues raised in the
public comments and our responses follow.
Comment: Some commenters stated that we should provide
beneficiaries and ENs that are not State VR agencies an opportunity for
a face-to-face hearing. Several recommended that the administrative and
judicial review process for appeal of initial determinations
(Secs. 404.900 through 404.999 and 416.1400 through 416.1499) be used
for the dispute resolution process. One commenter suggested that
beneficiaries should be entitled to the rights customary to evidentiary
hearings, including the right to be provided notice, the right to
request discovery, the right to present evidence, the right to defend
oneself, the right to cross-examine witnesses, the right to a written
decision, and the opportunity to appeal. Another commenter stated that
the time frame for appeal of a decision should be 60 days to be
consistent with time frames in our administrative review process.
Response: Section 1148(d)(7) of the Act requires, among other
things, that the Commissioner provide a mechanism for resolving
disputes between beneficiaries and ENs. The Commissioner is required to
afford a party to such a dispute a reasonable opportunity for a full
and fair review of the matter in dispute. The Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), provides a process for
resolution of disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are State VR
agencies. The Commissioner has developed a different process for
resolving disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are not State VR
agencies.
We believe that the dispute resolution process we have created
provides the parties with a reasonable opportunity to have a full and
fair review of the matter in dispute. Section 1148(d)(7) does not
require the Commissioner to afford a face-to-face hearing. The
legislation did not allocate funding to support this type of process.
Disputes between beneficiaries and ENs relate to aspects of the
rehabilitation process, such as proposed changes in the vocational goal
and the Individual Work Plan, the nature and duration of education and
training, and the type and availability of equipment provided. Multiple
disputes may arise between a beneficiary and the EN at different points
in the rehabilitation process, and each dispute will require quick
resolution to maintain ongoing rehabilitation efforts. Submission of
these types of disputes to the administrative and judicial review
process reserved for critical payment issues would impose unacceptable
administrative and financial burdens on the Agency. This would also
disrupt the rehabilitation process while relatively minor issues could
remain unresolved during a lengthy appeal process.
We are retaining the 3-step process set forth in the proposed
rules, because this process meets the statutory mandate for a full and
fair review of disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are not
State VR agencies. It provides the parties several opportunities to be
heard, allows both parties to the dispute to present their case before
an impartial third party, the PM, and expedites dispute resolution.
Comment: Many commenters questioned whether the 3-step process for
resolving disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are not State VR
agencies provides a full and fair review. Several commenters proposed
that we establish a single, standard grievance model at step one for
use by all ENs that are not State VR agencies. Other commenters said
that we should provide beneficiaries clear information about the
dispute resolution process, including defined ``next steps,'' impose
reasonable time frames, and inform disputants of the right to be
represented and the right to provide evidence at each step of the
dispute resolution process. In addition, one commenter said that the PM
should be required to provide all the evidence, not just relevant
evidence, when a dispute is referred to us at step 3.
Response: The 3-step process in subpart I provides for expedient
resolution of disputes between beneficiaries and ENs, and a full and
fair review of the disputed issues. Requiring ENs that are not State VR
agencies to implement a standard grievance model of our design at the
first step of the 3-step dispute resolution process would impose unfair
burdens on them. ENs are voluntary participants in the Ticket to Work
program, and some ENs might choose to withdraw from this program if
required to implement a new process distinct from internal grievance
procedures already in place.
In subpart I, we require that:
At step one, the EN that is not a State VR agency is required: to
have grievance procedures that a beneficiary can use to seek a
resolution to a dispute under the Ticket to Work program; to give each
beneficiary seeking services a copy of its internal grievance
procedures; to inform each beneficiary seeking services of the right of
either party to refer a dispute first to the PM for a review, and then
to us for a final decision; and to inform each beneficiary of the
availability of assistance from the State P&A system.
At step two, if the beneficiary or the EN that is not a State VR
agency asks the PM to review a disputed issue, the PM is to contact the
EN to submit all relevant information and evidence
[[Page 67418]]
within 10 days, including a description of the disputed issue, a
summary of the beneficiary's and the EN's positions related to each
disputed issue, and a description of any solutions proposed by the EN,
including the reasons the beneficiary rejected each proposed solution.
The PM has 20 days to provide a written recommendation resolving the
dispute, and explaining the reasoning for the proposed resolution.
At step three, if the beneficiary or the EN requests SSA to review
the PM's recommended resolution of the dispute, this request must be
made within 15 working days of the receipt of the PM's recommendation.
The PM has 10 working days to refer the request to us for a review,
including with the request a copy of the beneficiary's IWP, information
and evidence related to the disputed issues, and the PM's conclusions
and recommendations. Our decision on the resolution of the dispute will
be final.
Comment: Some commenters suggested that the process for resolving
disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are not State VR agencies
should provide for optional mediation or an external appeals process to
ensure the beneficiary an unbiased resolution of the dispute. Several
commenters said that the Dispute Resolution Board mentioned in the
preamble to the proposed rules for this process should have non-SSA
employees. Another commenter stated that the third step should be
eliminated and the final decision delegated to the PM at step two.
Response: In developing these rules, we considered making outside
mediation part of the dispute resolution process, but we rejected this
option, in part, because we believe using an outside mediator would not
achieve expedient dispute resolution. We also believe that it is not
necessary to establish any external appeals process for dispute
resolution, because we believe the three-step process provides for a
full and fair review. We have deleted any reference to a dispute
resolution board, as the proposed rules did not provide for it, but it
was only mentioned in the preamble to the proposed rules. At step
three, disputes will be referred to SSA rather than to a formal board.
We do not agree that step three should be eliminated from the dispute
resolution process and that the PM should make the final dispute
decision. An appeal to SSA affords the beneficiary an additional
opportunity to be heard and to receive the Commissioner's opinion on
the issue.
Comment: Some commenters stated that the dispute resolution process
for disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are not State VR
agencies should be the same as the process that is used for those
disputes between beneficiaries and ENs that are State VR agencies.
Response: State VR agencies that are serving as ENs have dispute
resolution procedures in place already. The dispute resolution process
used by State VR agencies provides an opportunity for beneficiaries and
State agencies to resolve disputes by formal mediation, an impartial
hearing, or civil action. The dispute resolution process that the State
VR agencies are required to follow fulfills and exceeds the requirement
of section 1148(d)(7) of the Social Security Act for a full and fair
review of the matter in dispute.
We recognize that beneficiaries who choose to work with State VR
agencies will have a different dispute resolution process than those
who choose to work with non-State agency ENs. However, the 3-step
process described in the regulations provides these beneficiaries with
a full and fair review, in an expeditious and cost-efficient manner.
Comment: Several commenters pointed out that our proposed rules
were not clear with respect to whether they addressed both ENs that are
not State VR agencies and those that are. Several others stated that
the regulations should indicate when the provisions of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.),
relating to opportunities for mediation, an impartial hearing, and
court action apply.
Response: We are revising the rules in subpart I to clarify whether
they referred to ENs that are not State VR agencies, or those that are
State VR agencies.
Comment: One commenter stated that services and supports provided
to a beneficiary should not be suspended or reduced while the
beneficiary is involved in the dispute resolution process. Another
asked if the timely progress guidelines would be suspended immediately
when a dispute is not solved.
Response: Participation of ENs in the Ticket to Work program is
voluntary. We believe that requiring ENs to continue providing supports
or services until disputes are resolved would not be consistent with
these aspects of the program. The timely progress guidelines will not
be suspended when a dispute remains unsolved.
Comment: Several commenters stated that we should provide
beneficiaries the names and addresses of P&A services and
representatives. One commenter suggested we should notify P&A services
of all disputes and the names of disputants, unless the beneficiaries
specifically objected. Another commenter stated that we should ensure
all representatives are expert in all aspects of benefits. And, several
commenters suggested that legal services for beneficiaries involved in
disputes be paid for.
Response: Section 411.605(d) requires ENs that are not State VR
agencies to inform beneficiaries of the availability of P&A services to
assist them in the dispute resolution process. We will not release any
information to a P&A service about the beneficiary unless we are
authorized to do so, in accord with our regulations governing
disclosure of official records and information (20 CFR 401.100 ff.). We
will require ENs to inform beneficiaries of the right to be represented
at each step of the dispute resolution process. We do not have the
authority to pay such representatives. We are not establishing
standards of expertise for representatives, because this would impair
the beneficiary's ability to choose non-attorneys to help them with
their disputes (e.g., family members, clergy, members of the
rehabilitation community). The ability to use non-attorneys to
represent beneficiaries in minor disputes is especially important
because many beneficiaries may not be able to pay for representation.
Comment: Several commenters suggest we require disputants to adhere
to our final recommendations for resolving issues between them.
Response: Because the Ticket to Work program is voluntary in
nature, the good will and commitment of both parties to the
rehabilitation effort is critical to its successful outcome. The three-
step dispute resolution process should promote positive and productive
communication between these parties. We do not believe that mandating
participants to adhere to our recommendations for dispute resolution
would further the rehabilitation partnership.
Youth in Transition to Adulthood
Section 411.125 of these final regulations states that an
individual will be eligible to receive a ticket in a month in which he
or she is age 18 or older and has not attained age 65, provided the
individual has qualified for title II benefits based on disability or
qualified for title XVI benefits based on disability under the adult
standard or based on blindness.
When we published the proposed rules on December 28, 2000, we
included the following: ``As we gain experience with the Ticket to Work
program, we plan, at a later time, to explore the possibility of
expanding the
[[Page 67419]]
age criteria for receiving a ticket to include those SSI beneficiaries
age 16 and older who are eligible for disability benefit payments based
on the childhood disability standard.''
In these final rules, we have decided not to issue a ticket to
those recipients under age 18 and those who have attained age 18, but
for whom we have not yet conducted a redetermination of their
eligibility under the disability standard for adults. However, we are
interested in exploring various approaches to assist youth
beneficiaries to transition to independence, further education, and
careers in the workforce. Therefore, we are publishing a Notice
elsewhere in today's Federal Register in which we are seeking
suggestions from the public to assist us in designing for these
beneficiaries an approach that could complement the Ticket to Work
program.
Electronic Version
The electronic version of this document is available on the
Internet at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html. It is
also available on the Internet site for SSA at http://www.ssa.gov.
Regulatory Procedures
Executive Order 12866
We have consulted with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
and determined that these final rules meet the criteria for a
significant regulatory activity under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.
Thus, OMB has reviewed these final rules. For the five-year period from
fiscal year 2002 through 2006, the effects on the Old Age, Survivors
and Disability Insurance benefit payments range from minimal in fiscal
year 2002 to costs of $27 million in fiscal year 2006. For the same
period, the effects on Federal Supplemental Security Income payments
range from savings of $1 million in fiscal year 2002 to savings of $6
million in fiscal year 2006. We expect that the effects on expenditures
of the Medicare and Medicaid programs during that time period would be
negligible. As the costs and savings from fiscal year 2002 through 2006
are not expected to exceed $100 million in any one year, these final
rules are neither economically significant under E.O. 12866, nor
``major'' under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.
However, we believe there may be additional ``benefits'' to society
that will result from these rules. While these benefits are difficult
to quantify, we can present some general elements of these benefits.
We believe the Ticket to Work program offers potential benefits to
society on several levels. For example, the Ticket to Work program may
increase opportunities for individuals who receive disability benefits
to access training, employment and placement services, including
opportunities to create their own businesses and widen their exposure
to the employment market. The program may provide new funding streams
for existing providers of vocational services and give them access to
new clients, as well as allow them to forge relationships with
employers interested in job placement of these clients. It may also
encourage the establishment of new providers of vocational services.
For employers, the program may provide access to a new base of
potential employees as individuals who receive disability benefits
attempt to enter the employment market under the terms of the Ticket to
Work program.
As required by the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement
Act of 1999, we must evaluate the Ticket to Work program after it is
implemented. As part of that evaluation, we plan to use various
qualitative measures to determine the effects on society.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that these final rules will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they
would primarily affect only individuals, and those entities that
voluntarily enter into a contractual agreement with us. Therefore, a
regulatory flexibility analysis as provided in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, as amended, is not required.
Although a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, we have
made every effort to consider the effects these rules might have on
small entities that might choose to participate in the Ticket to Work
program. As we mentioned earlier in this preamble, we sponsored and
participated in many public forums, presentations, and discussions
leading up to the development of these final rules. At these forums, we
discussed with service providers their concerns about participating in
the Ticket to Work program. These final rules reflect our efforts to
make these rules as inclusive as possible; that is, to allow for the
participation in the program of many different types of vocational
service providers, including small entities, that can provide a wide
range of services. For example, we increased the number and total
amount of milestone payments, from what we had earlier proposed, to
help smaller or lesser-capitalized entities to participate in the
program. We also considered the effects on small entities in
determining the level of credentials a service provider must have to
participate in the program. At the same time, we must also consider our
stewardship responsibilities in protecting the public funds and in
assuring that individuals receiving disability benefits who choose to
participate in the Ticket to Work program also receive quality services
from the providers to whom they assign their tickets. We believe these
final rules reflect our efforts to achieve a balance between providing
opportunities for small entities, and protecting public funds and
assuring that individuals receiving disability benefits receive quality
services.
Federalism
We have reviewed these final rules under the threshold criteria of
E.O. 13132, ``Federalism,'' and determined that they do not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. The Ticket
to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999 established the
Ticket to Work program that will complement the existing State
vocational rehabilitation program.
Although we have determined that these final rules do not trigger
the requirements of E.O. 13132, we have consulted with State vocational
rehabilitation agencies and their national organization throughout our
development of these rules. As mentioned earlier in the preamble to
these rules, we sponsored and participated in numerous educational
forums throughout the country in order to stimulate discussion about
the Ticket to Work program. We employed our long-standing relationship
with the State vocational rehabilitation agencies through a variety of
meetings, forums and other conversations to gain insight as to how to
develop these rules. Furthermore, we have consulted on a regular basis
with those States selected for the first round of the Ticket to Work
rollout, and the Department of Education's Rehabilitation Services
Administration in preparing these rules. These final rules reflect, to
the extent practicable, our efforts to respond to the issues raised by
the States during these consultations.
In addition, we note that the Old-Age, Survivors and Disability
Insurance program is exempt from the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
[[Page 67420]]
Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule contains new reporting (Rpt), recordkeeping (Rec)
and disclosure (Dis) requirements in the sections listed below. These
burden requirements have been cleared under OMB Number 0960-0644. The
clearance expires on December 31, 2004.
Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program Annual Burden Calculation Chart
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average burden Estimated
Section No. and requirements Number of Frequency of response per response annual burden
respondents (in minutes) hrs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
411.140(c) Rpt--X-refer sections 31,450 One time................. 270 141,525
411.145, 411.150, 411.325 (a), (b),
(c), (d) & 411.320 (f).
411.325(e) Rpt--X-refer section 10,328 Quarterly................ 120 20,656
411.395 (b).
411.325(f) Dis--X-refer section 45,000 Occasional............... 5 3,750
411.395(a).
411.190(a) Rpt--X-refer section 1,000 One time................. 30 500
411.195.
411.220(b)(1) Rpt--.................. 1,000 One time................. 30 500
411.220(c)(1) Rpt--.................. 500 One time................. 5 42
441.245(b)(1) Rec--.................. 12,000 One time................. 1 200
411.325(d) Rpt--..................... 1,800 One time................. 480 14,400
411.365 Rpt--........................ 82 One time................. 240 328
411.575 Rpt--X-refer section 411.500. 13,000 Daily.................... 30 6,500
411.605(b) Dis--X-refer section 45,000 Occasional............... 5 3,750
411.610.
411.435(c) Rpt--..................... 2,582 One time................. 60 2,582
411.615 Rpt--........................ 3,000 One time................. 60 3,000
411.625 Rpt--........................ 1,500 One time................. 60 1,500
411.210(b) Rpt--..................... 3,145 One time................. 30 1,573
411.590(b) Rpt--..................... 813 One time................. 60 813
411.655 Rpt--........................ 1 30-per year.............. 120 60
411.200 Rpt--........................ 1 ......................... 1 1
---------------
Total Annual Respondents......... .............. ......................... .............. 172,202
Total Annual Burden Hours........ .............. ......................... .............. 201,680
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Refer--Burden for these sections has been accounted for under title section cited.
411.200--Reflects a one hour places holder pending implementation and program experience.
The below chart represents burden associated with forms SSA-1365,
State Agency Ticket Assignment Form; SSA-1366, State Vocational
Rehabilitation Ticket to Work Information Sheet, and SSA-1367,
Individual Work Plans (IWP) Information Work Sheet, that have been
cleared under OMB-0641. The clearance expires on April 30, 2002.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average burden Estimated
Forms Respondents Frequency of per response annual burden
response (minutes) hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SSA-1365........................................ 21 4,048 3 4,250
SSA-1366........................................ 21 132 2 92
SSA-1367........................................ 31,450 1 3 1,573
---------------
Total burden................................ .............. .............. .............. 5,915
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Program Nos. 96.001, Social Security-
Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social Security-Retirement Insurance;
96.004, Social Security-Survivors Insurance; and 96.006,
Supplemental Security Income)
List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 411
Administrative practice and procedure; Blind, Disability benefits;
Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance; Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements; Social Security; Supplemental Security
Income; Public Assistance programs; Vocational Rehabilitation.
Dated: December 18, 2001.
Jo Anne B. Barnhart,
Commissioner of Social Security.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, we are adding a new part
411 to chapter III of title 20 of the Code of Federal Regulations to
read as follows:
PART 411--The Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program
Subpart A--Introduction
Sec.
411.100 Scope.
411.105 What is the purpose of the Ticket to Work program?
411.110 How is the Ticket to Work program implemented?
411.115 Definitions of terms used in this part.
Subpart B--Tickets Under the Ticket to Work Program
411.120 What is a ticket under the Ticket to Work program?
411.125 Who is eligible to receive a ticket under the Ticket to
Work program?
411.130 How will SSA distribute tickets under the Ticket to Work
program?
411.135 What do I do when I receive a ticket?
411.140 When can I assign my ticket and how?
411.145 Once my ticket has been assigned to an EN or State VR
agency, can it be taken out of assignment?
411.150 Can I reassign my ticket to a different EN or the State VR
agency?
411.155 When does my ticket terminate?
[[Page 67421]]
Subpart C--Suspension of Continuing Disability Reviewsfor Beneficiaries
Who are Using a Ticket
Introduction
411.160 What does this subpart do?
411.165 How does being in the Ticket to Work program affect my
continuing disability reviews?
411.166 Glossary of terms used in this subpart.
Definition of Using a Ticket
411.170 When does the period of using a ticket begin?
411.171 When does the period of using a ticket end?
411.175 What if I assign my ticket after a continuing disability
review has begun?
Guidelines for Timely Progress Toward Self-Supporting Employment
411.180 What is timely progress toward self-supporting employment?
411.185 How much do I need to earn to be considered to be working?
411.190 How is it determined if I am meeting the timely progress
guidelines?
411.191 Table summarizing the guidelines for timely progress
toward self-supporting employment.
411.195 How will the PM conduct my 24-month progress review?
411.200 How will the PM conduct my 12-month progress reviews?
411.205 What if I disagree with the PM's decision about whether I
am making timely progress toward self-supporting employment?
Failure To Make Timely Progress
411.210 What happens if I do not make timely progress toward self-
supporting employment?
The Extension Period
411.220 What if my ticket is no longer assigned to an EN or State
VR agency?
411.225 What if I reassign my ticket after the end of the
extension period?
Subpart D--Use of One or More Program Managers To Assist in
Administration of the Ticket to Work Program
411.230 What is a PM?
411.235 What qualifications are required of a PM?
411.240 What limitations are placed on a PM?
411.245 What are a PM's responsibilities under the Ticket to Work
program?
Evaluation of Program Manager Performance
411.250 How will SSA evaluate a PM?
Subpart E--Employment Networks
411.300 What is an EN?
411.305 Who is eligible to be an EN?
411.310 How does an entity other than a State VR agency apply to be
an EN and who will determine whether an entity qualifies as an EN?
411.315 What are the minimum qualifications necessary to be an EN?
411.320 What are an EN's responsibilities as a participant in the
Ticket to Work program?
411.321 Under what conditions will SSA terminate an agreement with
an EN due to inadequate performance?
411.325 What reporting requirements are placed on an EN as a
participant in the Ticket to Work program?
411.330 How will SSA evaluate an EN's performance?
Subpart F--State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies' Participation
Participation in the Ticket to Work Program
411.350 Must a State VR agency participate in the Ticket to Work
program?
411.355 What payment options does a State VR agency have under the
Ticket to Work program?
411.360 How does a State VR agency become an EN?
411.365 How does a State VR agency notify SSA about its choice of a
payment system for use when functioning as an EN?
411.370 Does a State VR agency ever have to function as an EN?
411.375 Does a State VR agency continue to provide services under
the requirements of the State plan approved under title I of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), when
functioning as an EN?
Ticket Status
411.380 What does a State VR agency do if the State VR agency wants
to determine whether a person seeking services has a ticket?
411.385 What does a State VR agency do if a beneficiary who is
eligible for VR services has a ticket that is available for
assignment or reassignment?
411.390 What does a State VR agency do if a beneficiary to whom it
is already providing services has a ticket that is available for
assignment?
411.395 Is a State VR agency required to provide periodic reports?
Referrals by Employment Networks to State VR Agencies
411.400 Can an EN to which a beneficiary's ticket is assigned refer
the beneficiary to a State VR agency for services?
Agreements Between Employment Networks and State VR Agencies
411.405 When does an agreement between an EN and the State VR
agency have to be in place?
411.410 Does each referral from an EN to a State VR agency require
its own agreement?
411.415 Who will verify the establishment of agreements between ENs
and State VR agencies?
411.420 What information should be included in an agreement between
an EN and a State VR agency?
411.425 What should a State VR agency do if it gets an attempted
referral from an EN and no agreement has been established between
the EN and the State VR agency?
411.430 What should the PM do when it is informed that an EN has
attempted to make a referral to a State VR agency without an
agreement being in place?
Resolving Disputes Arising Under Agreements Between Employment Networks
and State VR Agencies
411.435 How will disputes arising under the agreements between ENs
and State VR agencies be resolved?
Subpart G--Requirements for Individual Work Plans
411.450 What is an Individual Work Plan?
411.455 What is the purpose of an IWP?
411.460 Who is responsible for determining what information is
contained in the IWP?
411.465 What are the minimum requirements for an IWP?
411.470 When does an IWP become effective?
Subpart H--Employment Network Payment Systems
411.500 Definitions of terms used in this subpart.
411.505 How is an EN paid by SSA?
411.510 How is the State VR agency paid under the Ticket to Work
program?
411.515 Can the EN change its elected payment system?
411.520 How are beneficiaries whose tickets are assigned to an EN
affected by a change in that EN's elected payment system?
411.525 How are the EN payments calculated under each of the two
EN payment systems?
411.530 How will the outcome payments be reduced when paid under
the outcome-milestone payment system?
411.535 What are the milestones for which an EN can be paid?
411.540 What are the payment amounts for each of the milestones?
411.545 What are the payment amounts for outcome payment months
under the outcome-milestone payment system?
411.550 What are the payment amounts for outcome payment months
under the outcome payment system?
411.555 Can the EN keep the milestone and outcome payments even if
the beneficiary does not achieve all 60 outcome months?
411.560 Is it possible to pay a milestone or outcome payment to
more than one EN?
411.565 What happens if two or more ENs qualify for payment on the
same ticket but have elected different EN payment systems?
411.570 Can an EN request payment from the beneficiary who
assigned a ticket to the EN?
411.575 How does the EN request payment for milestones or outcome
payment months achieved by a beneficiary who assigned a ticket to
the EN?
411.580 Can an EN receive payments for milestones or outcome
payment months that occur before the beneficiary assigns a ticket to
the EN?
411.585 Can a State VR agency and an EN both receive payment for
serving the same beneficiary?
411.587 Which provider will SSA pay if, with respect to the same
ticket, SSA receives a request for payment from an EN or a State VR
agency that elected
[[Page 67422]]
payment under an EN payment system and a request for payment from a
State VR agency that elected payment under the cost reimbursement
payment system?
411.590 What can an EN do if the EN disagrees with our decision on
a payment request?
411.595 What oversight procedures are planned for the EN payment
systems?
411.597 Will SSA periodically review the outcome payment system
and the outcome-milestone payment system for possible modifications?
Subpart I--Ticket to Work Program Dispute Resolution
Disputes Between Beneficiaries and Employment Networks
411.600 Is there a process for resolving disputes between
beneficiaries and ENs that are not State VR agencies?
411.605 What are the responsibilities of the EN that is not a State
VR agency regarding the dispute resolution process?
411.610 When should a beneficiary receive information on the
procedures for resolving disputes?
411.615 How will a disputed issue be referred to the PM?
411.620 How long does the PM have to recommend a resolution to the
dispute?
411.625 Can the beneficiary or the EN that is not a State VR agency
request a review of the PM's recommendation?
411.630 Is SSA's decision final?
411.635 Can a beneficiary be represented in the dispute resolution
process under the Ticket to Work program?
Disputes Between Beneficiaries and State VR Agencies
411.640 Do the dispute resolution procedures of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), apply to
beneficiaries seeking services from the State VR agency?
Disputes Between Employment Networks and Program Managers
411.650 Is there a process for resolving disputes between ENs that
are not State VR agencies and PMs, other than disputes on a payment
request?
411.655 How will the PM refer the dispute to us?
411.660 Is SSA's decision final?
Subpart J--The Ticket to Work Program and Alternate Participants Under
the Programs for Payments for Vocational Rehabilitation Services
411.700 What is an alternate participant?
411.705 Can an alternate participant become an EN?
411.710 How will an alternate participant choose to participate as
an EN in the Ticket to Work program?
411.715 If an alternate participant becomes an EN, will
beneficiaries for whom an employment plan was signed prior to
implementation be covered under the Ticket to Work program payment
provisions?
411.720 If an alternate participant chooses not to become an EN,
can it continue to function under the programs for payments for VR
services?
411.725 If an alternate participant becomes an EN and it has
signed employment plans, both as an alternate participant and an EN,
how will SSA pay for services provided under each employment plan?
411.730 What happens if an alternate participant signed an
employment plan with a beneficiary before Ticket to Work program
implementation in the State and the required period of substantial
gainful activity is not completed by January 1, 2004?
Authority: Sec. 1148 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1320b-19); sec. 101(b)-(e), Pub. L. 106-170, 113 Stat. 1860, 1873
(42 U.S.C. 1320b-19 note).
Subpart A--Introduction
Sec. 411.100 Scope.
The regulations in this part 411 relate to the provisions of
section 1148 of the Social Security Act which establishes the Ticket to
Work and Self-Sufficiency Program (hereafter referred to as the
``Ticket to Work program''). The regulations in this part are divided
into ten subparts:
(a) Subpart A explains the scope of this part, explains the purpose
and manner of implementation of the Ticket to Work program, and
provides definitions of terms used in this part.
(b) Subpart B contains provisions relating to the ticket under the
Ticket to Work program.
(c) Subpart C contains provisions relating to the suspension of
continuing disability reviews for disabled beneficiaries who are
considered to be using a ticket.
(d) Subpart D contains provisions relating to the use of one or
more program managers to assist us in the administration of the Ticket
to Work program.
(e) Subpart E contains provisions relating to employment networks
in the Ticket to Work program.
(f) Subpart F contains provisions relating to State vocational
rehabilitation agencies' participation in the Ticket to Work program.
(g) Subpart G contains provisions relating to individual work plans
in the Ticket to Work program.
(h) Subpart H contains provisions establishing employment network
payment systems.
(i) Subpart I contains provisions that establish a procedure for
resolving disputes under the Ticket to Work program.
(j) Subpart J contains provisions explaining how the implementation
of the Ticket to Work program affects alternate participants under the
programs for payments for vocational rehabilitation services under
subpart V of part 404 and subpart V of part 416 of this chapter.
Sec. 411.105 What is the purpose of the Ticket to Work program?
The purpose of the Ticket to Work program is to expand the universe
of service providers available to individuals who are entitled to
Social Security benefits based on disability or eligible for
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits based on disability or
blindness in obtaining the services necessary to find, enter and retain
employment. Expanded employment opportunities for these individuals
also will increase the likelihood that these individuals will reduce
their dependency on Social Security and SSI cash benefits.
Sec. 411.110 How is the Ticket to Work program implemented?
We are implementing the Ticket to Work program in graduated phases
at phase-in sites around the country. We are implementing the program
at sites on a wide enough scale to allow for a thorough evaluation and
ensure full implementation of the program on a timely basis.
Sec. 411.115 Definitions of terms used in this part.
As used in this part:
(a) ``The Act'' means the Social Security Act, as amended.
(b) ``Commissioner'' means the Commissioner of Social Security.
(c) ``Cost reimbursement payment system'' means the provisions for
payment for vocational rehabilitation services under subpart V of part
404 and subpart V of part 416 of this chapter.
(d) ``Disabled beneficiary'' means a title II disability
beneficiary or a title XVI disability beneficiary.
(e) ``Employment network'' or ``EN'' means a qualified public or
private entity that has entered into an agreement with us to serve
under the Ticket to Work program and that assumes responsibility for
the coordination and delivery of employment services, vocational
rehabilitation services, or other support services to beneficiaries
assigning tickets to it. The rules on employment networks are described
in subpart E of this part (Secs. 411.300-411.330). A State vocational
rehabilitation agency may choose, on a case-by-case basis, to function
as an employment network with respect to a beneficiary under the Ticket
to Work program. The rules on State vocational rehabilitation agencies'
participation in the Ticket to Work program are described in subpart F
of this part (Secs. 411.350-411.435).
[[Page 67423]]
(f) ``Employment plan'' means an individual work plan described in
paragraph (i) of this section, or an individualized plan for employment
described in paragraph (j) of this section. When used in subpart J of
this part, ``employment plan'' also means a ``similar document''
referred to in Secs. 404.2114(a)(2) and 416.2214(a)(2) of this chapter
under which an alternate participant under the programs for payments
for vocational rehabilitation services (described in subpart V of part
404 and subpart V of part 416 of this chapter) provides services to a
disabled beneficiary under those programs.
(g) ``Federal SSI cash benefits'' means a ``Supplemental Security
Income benefit under title XVI'' based on blindness or disability as
described in paragraphs (n) and (r) of this section.
(h) ``I'', ``my'', ``you'', or ``your'' means the disabled
beneficiary.
(i) ``Individual work plan'' or ``IWP'' means an employment plan
under which an employment network (other than a State vocational
rehabilitation agency) provides services to a disabled beneficiary
under the Ticket to Work program. An individual work plan must be
developed under, and meet the requirements of, the rules in subpart G
of this part (Secs. 411.450-411.470).
(j) ``Individualized plan for employment'' or ``IPE'' means an
employment plan under which a State vocational rehabilitation agency
provides services to individuals with disabilities (including
beneficiaries assigning tickets to it under the Ticket to Work program)
under a State plan approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.). An individualized plan for
employment must be developed under, and meet the requirements of, 34
CFR 361.45 and 361.46.
(k) ``Program manager'' or ``PM'' means an organization in the
private or public sector that has entered into a contract with us to
assist us in administering the Ticket to Work program. The rules on the
use of one or more program managers to assist us in administering the
program are described in subpart D of this part (Secs. 411.230-
411.250).
(l) ``Social Security disability benefits'' means the benefits
described in paragraph (q) of this section.
(m) ``State vocational rehabilitation agency'' or ``State VR
agency'' means a State agency administering or supervising the
administration of the State plan approved under title I of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.). In
those States that have one agency that provides VR services to non-
blind individuals and another agency that provides services to blind
individuals, this term refers to either State agency.
(n) ``Supplemental Security Income benefit under title XVI'' means
a cash benefit under section 1611 or 1619(a) of the Act, and does not
include a State supplementary payment, administered Federally or
otherwise.
(o) ``Ticket'' means a document described in Sec. 411.120 which the
Commissioner may issue to disabled beneficiaries for participation in
the Ticket to Work program.
(p) ``Ticket to Work program'' or ``program'' means the Ticket to
Work and Self-Sufficiency Program under section 1148 of the Act.
(q) ``Title II disability beneficiary'' means an individual
entitled to disability insurance benefits under section 223 or to
monthly insurance benefits under section 202 of the Act based on such
individual's disability as defined in section 223(d) of the Act. (See
Sec. 404.1505 of this chapter.) An individual is a title II disability
beneficiary for each month for which such individual is entitled to
such benefits.
(r) ``Title XVI disability beneficiary'' means an individual
eligible for Supplemental Security Income benefits under title XVI on
the basis of blindness (within the meaning of section 1614(a)(2) of the
Act) (see Secs. 416.981 and 416.982 of this chapter) or disability
(within the meaning of section 1614(a)(3) of the Act) (see Sec. 416.905
of this chapter). An individual is a title XVI disability beneficiary
for each month for which such individual is eligible for such benefits.
(s) ``We'' or ``us'' means the Social Security Administration.
Subpart B--Tickets Under the Ticket to Work Program
Sec. 411.120 What is a ticket under the Ticket to Work program?
(a) A ticket under the Ticket to Work program is a document which
provides evidence of the Commissioner's agreement to pay, under the
rules in subpart H of this part, an employment network (EN) or a State
VR agency to which a disabled beneficiary's ticket is assigned, for
providing employment services, vocational rehabilitation services, and
other support services to the beneficiary.
(b) The ticket is a red, white and blue document approximately 6"
by 9" in size. The left side of the document includes the beneficiary's
name, ticket number, claim account number and the date we issued the
ticket. The ticket number is 12 characters and comprises the
beneficiary's own social security number, the letters ``TW'' and a
number 1, 2, etc. A number 1 in the last position would signify that
this is the first ticket the beneficiary has received, consistent with
Sec. 411.125(b).
(c) The right side of the ticket includes the signature of the
Commissioner of Social Security, and the following language:
This ticket is issued to you by the Social Security
Administration under the Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency
Program. If you want help in returning to work or going to work for
the first time, you may offer this ticket to an Employment Network
of your choosing or take it to your State vocational rehabilitation
agency for services. If you choose an Employment Network and it
agrees to take your ticket, or if you choose your State agency and
you qualify for services, these providers can offer you the services
you may need to go to work.
An Employment Network provides the services at no cost to you.
The Social Security Administration will pay the Employment Network
if you assign your ticket to it, and the Employment Network helps
you to go to work and complies with other requirements of the
Program. An Employment Network serving under the Program has agreed
to abide by the rules and regulations of the Program under the terms
of its agreement with the Social Security Administration for
providing services under the Program. Your State agency can tell you
about its rules for getting services.
Sec. 411.125 Who is eligible to receive a ticket under the Ticket to
Work program?
(a) You will be eligible to receive a Ticket to Work in a month in
which--
(1) You are age 18 or older and have not attained age 65;
(2)(i)(A) You are a title II disability beneficiary (other than a
beneficiary receiving benefit payments under Sec. 404.316(c),
Sec. 404.337(c), Sec. 404.352(d), or Sec. 404.1597a of this chapter);
and
(B) You are in current pay status for monthly title II cash
benefits based on disability (see subpart E of part 404 of this chapter
for our rules on nonpayment of title II benefits); or
(ii)(A) You are a title XVI disability beneficiary (other than a
beneficiary receiving disability or blindness benefit payments under
Sec. 416.996 or Sec. 416.1338 of this chapter);
(B) If you are an individual described in Sec. 416.987(a)(1) of
this chapter, you are eligible for benefits under title XVI based on
disability under the standard for evaluating disability for adults
following a redetermination of your eligibility under Sec. 416.987 of
this chapter; and
(C) Your monthly Federal cash benefits based on disability or
blindness under title XVI are not suspended (see
[[Page 67424]]
subpart M of part 416 of this chapter for our rules on suspension of
title XVI benefit payments); and
(3) Our records show that--
(i) Your case is not designated as a medical improvement expected
diary review case (see Secs. 404.1590 and 416.990 of this chapter for
what we mean by a medical improvement expected diary review); or
(ii) Your case is designated as a medical improvement expected
diary review case, and we have conducted at least one continuing
disability review in your case and made a final determination or
decision that your disability continues (see subpart J of part 404 or
subpart N of part 416 of this chapter for when a determination or
decision becomes final).
(b) You will not be eligible to receive more than one ticket during
any period during which you are either--
(1) Entitled to title II benefits based on disability (see
Secs. 404.316(b), 404.337(b) and 404.352(b) of this chapter for when
entitlement to title II disability benefits ends); or
(2) Eligible for title XVI benefits based on disability or
blindness and your eligibility has not terminated (see subpart M of
part 416 of this chapter for our rules on when eligibility for title
XVI benefits terminates).
(c) If your entitlement to title II benefits based on disability
ends and/or your eligibility for title XVI benefits based on disability
or blindness terminates as described in Sec. 411.155(b)(1) or (2), you
will be eligible to receive a new ticket in a month in which--
(1) Your entitlement to title II benefits based on disability is
reinstated under section 223(i) of the Act, or your eligibility for
title XVI benefits based on disability or blindness is reinstated under
section 1631(p) of the Act; and
(2) You meet the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this
section.
Sec. 411.130 How will SSA distribute tickets under the Ticket to Work
program?
(a) We will distribute tickets in graduated phases at phase-in
sites selected by the Commissioner, to permit a thorough evaluation of
the Ticket to Work program and ensure that the most effective methods
are in place for full implementation of the program. (See
Sec. 411.110.)
(b) We will distribute a ticket to you when we distribute tickets
in your State, if you are eligible to receive a ticket under
Sec. 411.125.
Sec. 411.135 What do I do when I receive a ticket?
Your participation in the Ticket to Work program is voluntary. When
you receive your ticket, you are free to choose when and whether to
assign it (see Sec. 411.140 for information on assigning your ticket).
If you want to participate in the program, you can take your ticket to
any EN you choose or to your State VR agency.
Sec. 411.140 When can I assign my ticket and how?
(a) You may assign your ticket only during a month in which you
meet the requirements of Sec. 411.125(a)(1) and (a)(2). You may assign
your ticket to any EN which is serving under the program and is willing
to provide you with services, or you may assign your ticket to a State
VR agency if you are eligible to receive VR services according to 34
CFR 361.42. You may not assign your ticket to more than one provider of
services (i.e. an EN or a State VR agency) at a time. Once you have
assigned your ticket to an EN or State VR agency, you may take your
ticket out of assignment for any reason under the rules in
Sec. 411.145(a). Also, you may reassign your ticket under the rules in
Sec. 411.150.
(b)(1) In determining which EN you want to work with, you may
discuss your rehabilitation and employment plans with as many ENs in
your area as you wish. You also may discuss your rehabilitation and
employment plans with the State VR agency.
(2) You can obtain a list of the approved ENs in your area from the
program manager (PM) we have enlisted to assist in the administration
of the Ticket to Work program. (See Sec. 411.115(k) for a definition of
the PM.)
(c) If you choose to work with an EN serving under the program,
both you and the EN of your choice need to agree upon an individual
work plan (IWP) (see Sec. 411.115(i) for a definition of an IWP). If
you choose to work with a State VR agency, you must develop an
individualized plan for employment (IPE) and your State VR counselor
must agree to the terms of the IPE, according to the requirements
established in 34 CFR 361.45 and 361.46. (See Sec. 411.115(j) for a
definition of an IPE.) The IWP or IPE outlines the services necessary
to assist you in achieving your chosen employment goal.
(d) In order for you to assign your ticket to an EN or State VR
agency, all of the following requirements must be met:
(1)(i) If you decide to work with an EN, you and a representative
of the EN must agree to and sign an IWP; or
(ii) If you decide to work with a State VR agency, you and a
representative of the State VR agency must agree to and sign both an
IPE and a form that provides the information described in
Sec. 411.385(a)(1), (2) and (3).
(2) You must be eligible to assign your ticket under the rules in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(3) A representative of the EN must submit a copy of the signed IWP
to the PM or a representative of the State VR agency must submit the
completed and signed form (as described in Sec. 411.385(a) and (b)) to
the PM.
(4) The PM must receive the copy of the IWP or receive the required
form, as appropriate.
(e) If all of the requirements in paragraph (d) of this section are
met, we will consider your ticket assigned to the EN or State VR
agency. The effective date of the assignment of your ticket will be the
first day on which the requirements of paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of
this section are met. See Secs. 411.160 through 411.225 for an
explanation of how assigning your ticket may affect medical reviews
that we conduct to determine if you are still disabled under our rules.
Sec. 411.145 Once my ticket has been assigned to an EN or State VR
agency, can it be taken out of assignment?
(a) If you assigned your ticket to an EN or a State VR agency, you
may take your ticket out of assignment for any reason. You must notify
the PM in writing that you wish to take your ticket out of assignment.
The ticket will be no longer assigned to that EN or State VR agency
effective with the first day of the month following the month in which
you notify the PM in writing that you wish to take your ticket out of
assignment. You may reassign your ticket under the rules in
Sec. 411.150.
(b) If your EN goes out of business or is no longer approved to
participate as an EN in the Ticket to Work program, the PM will take
your ticket out of assignment with that EN. The ticket will be no
longer assigned to that EN effective on the first day of the month
following the month in which the EN goes out of business or is no
longer approved to participate in the Ticket to Work program. You will
be sent a notice informing you that your ticket is no longer assigned
to that EN. In addition, if your EN is no longer willing or able to
provide you with services, or if your State VR agency stops providing
services to you because you have been determined to be ineligible for
VR services under 34 CFR 361.42, the EN or State VR agency may ask the
PM to take your ticket out of assignment with that EN or State VR
agency. The ticket will be no longer assigned to that EN or State VR
agency effective on the first day of the month following the month in
[[Page 67425]]
which the EN or State VR agency makes a request to the PM that the
ticket be taken out of assignment. You will be sent a notice informing
you that your ticket is no longer assigned to that EN or State VR
agency. You may reassign your ticket under the rules in Sec. 411.150.
(c) For information about how taking a ticket out of assignment may
affect medical reviews that we conduct to determine if you are still
disabled under our rules, see Secs. 411.171(c) and 411.220.
Sec. 411.150 Can I reassign my ticket to a different EN or the State
VR agency?
(a) Yes. If you previously assigned your ticket and your ticket is
no longer assigned (see Sec. 411.145) or you wish to change the
assignment, you may reassign your ticket, unless you are receiving
benefit payments under Sec. 404.316(c), Sec. 404.337(c),
Sec. 404.352(d) or Sec. 404.1597a of this chapter, or you are receiving
disability or blindness benefit payments under Sec. 416.996 or
Sec. 416.1338 of this chapter (the provisions of paragraph (b)(3) of
this section notwithstanding). If you previously assigned your ticket
to an EN, you may reassign your ticket to a different EN which is
serving under the program and is willing to provide you with services,
or you may reassign your ticket to the State VR agency if you are
eligible to receive VR services according to 34 CFR 361.42. If you
previously assigned your ticket to the State VR agency, you may
reassign your ticket to an EN which is serving under the program and is
willing to provide you with services or to another State VR agency if
you are eligible to receive services according to 34 CFR 361.42.
(b) In order for you to reassign your ticket to an EN or State VR
agency, all of the following requirements must be met:
(1) Your ticket must be unassigned. If your ticket is assigned to
an EN or a State VR agency, you must first tell the PM in writing that
you want to take your ticket out of assignment (see Sec. 411.145).
(2)(i) You and a representative of the new EN must agree to and
sign a new IWP; or
(ii) If you wish to reassign your ticket to a State VR agency, you
and a representative of the State VR agency must agree to and sign both
an IPE and a form that provides the information described in
Sec. 411.385(a)(1), (2) and (3).
(3) You must meet the requirements of Sec. 411.125(a)(1) and (2) on
or after the day you and a representative of the new EN sign your IWP
or you and a representative of the State VR agency sign your IPE and
the required form, except if--
(i) Your ticket is not in use (see Sec. 411.170 et seq.) and the
requirements of paragraph (b)(2) of this section are met within 30 days
of the effective date your ticket no longer was assigned to the
previous EN or State VR agency (see Sec. 411.145); or
(ii) Your ticket is in use (see Sec. 411.170 et seq.) and the
requirements of paragraph (b)(2) of this section are met before the end
of the 3-month extension period described in Sec. 411.220.
(4) A representative of the EN must submit a copy of the signed IWP
to the PM or a representative of the State VR agency must submit the
completed and signed form (as described in Sec. 411.385(a) and (b)) to
the PM.
(5) The PM must receive the copy of the IWP or received the
required form, as appropriate.
(c) If all of the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
section are met, we will consider your ticket reassigned to the new EN
or State VR agency. The effective date of the reassignment of your
ticket will be the first day on which the requirements of paragraphs
(a) and (b)(1), (2) and (3) of this section are met. See Secs. 411.160
through 411.225 for an explanation of how reassigning your ticket may
affect medical reviews that we conduct to determine if you are still
disabled under our rules.
Sec. 411.155 When does my ticket terminate?
(a) Your ticket will terminate if and when you are no longer
eligible to participate in the Ticket to Work program. If your ticket
terminates, you may not assign or reassign it to an EN or State VR
agency. We will not pay an EN (including a State VR agency) for
milestones or outcomes achieved in or after the month in which your
ticket terminates (see Sec. 411.525(c)). Your eligibility to
participate in the Ticket to Work program will end, and your ticket
will terminate, in the earliest of the following months:
(1) The month in which your entitlement to title II benefits based
on disability ends for reasons other than your work activity or
earnings, or the month in which your eligibility for benefits under
title XVI based on disability or blindness terminates for reasons other
than your work activity or earnings, whichever is later;
(2) If you are entitled to widow's or widower's insurance benefits
based on disability (see Secs. 404.335 and 404.336 of this chapter),
the month in which you attain age 65; or
(3) If you are eligible for benefits under title XVI based on
disability or blindness, the month following the month in which you
attain age 65.
(b) The rules in paragraph (c) of this section apply in determining
when your eligibility to participate in the Ticket to Work program will
end and your ticket will terminate if--
(1) You were not a concurrent title II/title XVI disability
beneficiary, and your entitlement to title II benefits based on
disability ends or your eligibility for title XVI benefits based on
disability or blindness terminates because of your work activity or
earnings; or
(2) You were a concurrent title II/title XVI disability beneficiary
and--
(i) Your entitlement to title II benefits based on disability ends
because of work activity or earnings and your eligibility for title XVI
benefits based on disability or blindness terminates for any reason; or
(ii) Your eligibility for title XVI benefits based on disability or
blindness terminates because of your work activity or earnings and your
entitlement to title II benefits based on disability ends for any
reason.
(c) For purposes of paragraph (b) of this section, the ticket which
you received in connection with the previous period during which you
were either entitled to title II benefits based on disability or
eligible for title XVI benefits based on disability or blindness (as
described in Sec. 411.125(b)) will terminate, and your eligibility to
participate in the Ticket to Work program based on that ticket will
end, in the earliest of the following months:
(1) If we make a final determination or decision that you are not
entitled to have title II benefits based on disability reinstated under
section 223(i) of the Act or eligible to have title XVI benefits based
on disability or blindness reinstated under section 1631(p) of the Act,
the month in which we make that determination or decision;
(2) If we make a final determination or decision that you are not
entitled to title II benefits based on disability or eligible for title
XVI benefits based on disability or blindness after you file an
application for benefits, the month in which we make that determination
or decision;
(3) The month you attain retirement age (as defined in section
216(l) of the Act);
(4) The month in which you die;
(5) The month in which you become entitled to a title II benefit
that is not based on disability or eligible for a title XVI benefit
that is not based on disability or blindness;
(6) The month in which you again become entitled to title II
benefits based on disability, or eligible for title XVI benefits based
on disability or
[[Page 67426]]
blindness, based on the filing of an application for such benefits; or
(7) If your entitlement to title II benefits based on disability is
reinstated under section 223(i) of the Act, or your eligibility for
title XVI benefits based on disability or blindness is reinstated under
section 1631(p) of the Act, the month in which you are eligible to
receive a new ticket under Sec. 411.125(c).
Subpart C--Suspension of Continuing Disability Reviews for
Beneficiaries Who Are Using a Ticket
Introduction
Sec. 411.160 What does this subpart do?
(a) This subpart explains our rules about continuing disability
reviews for disability beneficiaries who are participating in the
Ticket to Work program.
(b) Continuing disability reviews are reviews that we conduct to
determine if you are still disabled under our rules (see
Secs. 404.1589, 416.989 and 416.989a of this chapter for the rules on
when we may conduct continuing disability reviews). For the purposes of
this subpart, continuing disability reviews include the medical reviews
we conduct to determine if your medical condition has improved (see
Secs. 404.1594 and 416.994 of this chapter), but not any review to
determine if your disability has ended under Sec. 404.1594(d)(5) of
this chapter because you have demonstrated your ability to engage in
substantial gainful activity (SGA), as defined in Secs. 404.1571-
404.1576 of this chapter.
Sec. 411.165 How does being in the Ticket to Work program affect my
continuing disability reviews?
We periodically review your case to determine if you are still
disabled under our rules. However, if you are in the Ticket to Work
program, we will not begin a continuing disability review during the
period in which you are using a ticket. Sections 411.170 and 411.171
describe when the period of using a ticket begins and ends. You must
meet certain requirements for us to consider you to be using a ticket.
Sec. 411.166 Glossary of terms used in this subpart.
(a) Active participation in your employment plan means you are
engaging in activities outlined in your employment plan on a regular
basis and in the approximate time frames specified in the employment
plan.
(b) Extension period is a period of up to three months during which
you may reassign a ticket without being subject to continuing
disability reviews. You may be eligible for an extension period if the
ticket is in use and no longer assigned to an Employment Network (EN)
or State VR agency (see Sec. 411.220).
(c) Inactive status is a status in which you may place your ticket
if you are temporarily unable to participate or not actively
participating in your employment plan. You may place a ticket in
inactive status only during the initial 24-month period. Months during
which your ticket is in inactive status do not count toward the time
limitations for making timely progress toward self-supporting
employment. You may keep your ticket in inactive status as long as you
choose. However, because the ticket is not in use during months in
which it is in inactive status, you will be subject to continuing
disability reviews during these months.
(d) Initial 24-month period means the 24-month period that begins
with the month following the month in which you first assigned your
ticket. We do not count any month in which the ticket is not assigned
to an EN or State VR agency, as described in Sec. 411.145, or any month
during which the ticket is not in use because it is in inactive status
(see Sec. 411.190(a)(2)) or because you were determined to be no longer
making timely progress toward self-supporting employment under
Sec. 411.190(a)(3) or Sec. 411.205.
(e) Progress review means the reviews the program manager (PM)
conducts to determine if you are meeting the timely progress guidelines
described in these regulations. (See Sec. 411.115(k) for a definition
of the PM.) The method for conducting the 24-month progress review is
explained in Sec. 411.195 and the method for conducting 12-month
progress reviews is explained in Sec. 411.200.
(f) Timely progress guidelines means the guidelines we use to
determine if you are making timely progress toward self-supporting
employment. In general, we determine if you are making timely progress
toward self-supporting employment using two distinct criteria with
defined time frames. These criteria are active participation in your
employment plan during the initial 24-month period and increased work
and earnings during subsequent 12-month progress review periods (see
Sec. 411.180 to Sec. 411.190, Sec. 411.195 and Sec. 411.200).
(g) 12-month progress review period means the 12-month period that
begins either following the end of the initial 24-month period or
following the previous 12-month progress review period. We do not count
any month during which your ticket is not assigned to an EN or State VR
agency, as described in Sec. 411.145.
(h) Using a ticket means that you have assigned a ticket to an EN
or State VR agency and are making timely progress toward self-
supporting employment. (See Sec. 411.171 for a discussion of when the
period of using a ticket ends.)
Definition of Using a Ticket
Sec. 411.170 When does the period of using a ticket begin?
The period of using a ticket begins on the effective date of the
assignment of your ticket to an EN or State VR agency under
Sec. 411.140.
Note: If your period of using a ticket ends because you have
previously failed to meet the timely progress guidelines under
Secs. 411.180 through 411.190, the period of using a ticket will
resume if you satisfy the requirements for re-entering in-use
status. (See Sec. 411.210.)
Sec. 411.171 When does the period of using a ticket end?
The period of using a ticket ends with the earliest of the
following--
(a) The month before the month in which the ticket terminates as a
result of one of the events listed in Sec. 411.155;
(b) The day before the effective date of a decision under
Sec. 411.190; Sec. 411.195, Sec. 411.200, or Sec. 411.205 that you are
no longer making timely progress toward self-supporting employment;
(c) The close of the three-month extension period which begins with
the first month in which your ticket is no longer assigned to an EN or
State VR agency (see Sec. 411.145), unless you reassign your ticket
within the three-month extension period (see Sec. 411.220 for an
explanation of the three-month extension period);
(d) The 60th month for which an outcome payment is made to your EN
(including a State VR agency) under subpart H of this part; or
(e) If you have assigned your ticket to a State VR agency which
selects the cost reimbursement payment system, the 60th month for which
an outcome payment would have been made had the State VR agency chosen
to serve you as an EN.
Sec. 411.175 What if I assign my ticket after a continuing disability
review has begun?
(a) If we begin a continuing disability review before the date on
which you assign a ticket, you may still assign the ticket and receive
services under the Ticket to Work program. However, we will complete
the continuing disability review. If in this review we determine that
you are no longer disabled, in most cases you will no longer be
eligible to receive benefit payments. However, if you assigned your
ticket before we determined that you are no longer
[[Page 67427]]
disabled, in certain circumstances you may continue to receive benefit
payments (see Secs. 404.316(c), 404.337(c), 404.352(d), and 416.1338 of
this chapter). If you appeal the decision that you are no longer
disabled, you may also choose to have your benefits continued pending
reconsideration and/or a hearing before an administrative law judge on
the cessation determination (see Secs. 404.1597a and 416.996 of this
chapter).
(b) The date on which we begin the continuing disability review is
the date on the notice we send you that tells you that we are beginning
to review your disability case.
Guidelines for Timely Progress Toward Self-Supporting Employment
Sec. 411.180 What is timely progress toward self-supporting
employment?
(a) General. The purpose of the Ticket to Work program is to
provide you with the services and supports you need to work and reduce
or eliminate your dependence on Social Security disability benefits
and/or SSI benefits based on disability or blindness. We consider you
to be making timely progress toward self-supporting employment when you
show an increasing ability to work at levels which will reduce or
eliminate your dependence on these benefits.
(b) Definitions. As used in this subpart--
(1) Initial 24-month period means the 24-month period that begins
with the month following the month in which you first assigned your
ticket. (See Secs. 411.220(e) and 411.225(c) for when a new initial 24-
month period may be established for you.) We do not count any month
during which the ticket is not assigned to an EN or State VR agency, as
described in Sec. 411.145, or any month during which the ticket is not
in use because it is in inactive status (see Sec. 411.190(a)(2)) or
because you were determined to be no longer making timely progress
toward self-supporting employment under Sec. 411.190(a)(3) or
Sec. 411.205.
(2) 12-month progress review period means the 12-month period that
begins either following the end of the initial 24-month period or
following the previous 12-month progress review period. We do not count
any month during which your ticket is not assigned to an EN or State VR
agency, as described in Sec. 411.145.
(c) Guidelines. We will determine whether you are making timely
progress toward self-supporting employment by using the following
guidelines:
(1) During the initial 24-month period after you assign your
ticket, you must be actively participating in your employment plan.
``Actively participating in your employment plan'' means that you are
engaging in activities outlined in your employment plan on a regular
basis and in the approximate time frames specified in the employment
plan. These activities may include employment, if agreed to in the
employment plan. At the end of the initial 24-month period, you must
successfully complete the 24-month progress review, as described in
Sec. 411.195. If you worked in one or more months during the initial
24-month period at the level of work applicable to the work requirement
for the first 12-month progress review period, each such month of work
may be used to reduce by one month the number of months of work
referred to in Sec. 411.195(a)(2) and Sec. 411.195(a)(3) for purposes
of meeting the requirements of those sections regarding a goal of three
months of work during the first 12-month progress review period.
(2) During your first 12-month progress review period, you must
work (as defined in Sec. 411.185) for at least three of these 12
months. The three months do not need to be consecutive. If you worked
one or more months during the initial 24-month period at the level of
work applicable to the work requirement for the first 12-month progress
review period, each such month of work may be used to reduce by one
month the number of months of work required for the first 12-month
progress review period.
(3) During your second 12-month progress review period, and in
later 12-month progress review periods, you must work (as defined in
Sec. 411.185) for at least six of these 12 months. The six months do
not need to be consecutive.
Sec. 411.185 How much do I need to earn to be considered to be
working?
For the purpose of determining if you are meeting the timely
progress requirements for continued ticket use, we will consider you to
be working in each month in which you have earnings at the following
levels:
(a) For title II disability beneficiaries:
(1) During your first and second 12-month progress review periods,
we will consider you to be working in a month in which you have
earnings from employment or self-employment at the SGA level for non-
blind beneficiaries, as defined in Secs. 404.1572 through 404.1576 of
this chapter. For a month in which you are in a trial work period (see
Sec. 404.1592 of this chapter), or if you are statutorily blind as
defined in Sec. 404.1581 of this chapter, we will consider the
following as fulfilling this requirement--
(i) Gross earnings from employment, before any deductions for
impairment related work expenses under Sec. 404.1576 of this chapter,
that are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind beneficiaries
in Sec. 404.1574(b)(2) of this chapter; or
(ii) Net earnings from self-employment (as defined in
Sec. 416.1110(b) of this chapter), before any deductions for impairment
related work expenses under Sec. 404.1576 of this chapter, that are
more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind beneficiaries in
Sec. 404.1574(b)(2) of this chapter.
Note to paragraph (a)(1): If you worked in one or more months
during the initial 24-month period at the level of work described in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section, those months of work may be used
to meet certain requirements of the 24-month progress review as
explained in Sec. 411.180(c)(1) and the work requirements for the
first 12-month progress review period as explained in
Sec. 411.180(c)(2).
(2) During your third 12-month progress review period, and during
later 12-month progress review periods, we will consider you to be
working in a month for which Social Security disability benefits are
not payable to you because of your work or earnings.
(b) For title XVI beneficiaries:
(1) During your first and second 12-month progress review periods,
we will consider you to be working in a month in which you have--
(i) Gross earnings from employment, before any SSI income
exclusions, that are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind
beneficiaries in Sec. 404.1574(b)(2) of this chapter; or
(ii) Net earnings from self-employment (as defined in
Sec. 416.1110(b) of this chapter), before any SSI income exclusions,
that are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind beneficiaries
in Sec. 404.1574(b)(2) of this chapter.
Example to paragraph (b)(1): If you earn $750 in January 2001,
but exclude $200 of this income in a Plan for Achieving Self-Support
(see Secs. 416.1180-416.1182 of this chapter), you would still be
considered to be working in that month.
Note to paragraph (b)(1): If you worked in one or more months
during the initial 24-month period at the level of work described in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, those months of work may be used
to meet certain requirements of the 24-month progress review as
explained in Sec. 411.180(c)(1) and the work requirements for the
first 12-month progress review period as explained in
Sec. 411.180(c)(2).
[[Page 67428]]
(2) During your third 12-month progress review period, and during
any later 12-month progress review periods, we will consider you to be
working in a month in which you have earnings from employment or self-
employment that are sufficient to preclude the payment of Federal SSI
cash benefits for a month.
(c) For concurrent title II and title XVI beneficiaries:
(1) During your first and second 12-month progress review periods,
we will consider you to be working in a month in which you have
earnings from employment or self-employment at the SGA level for non-
blind beneficiaries as defined in Secs. 404.1572 through 404.1576 of
this chapter. For a month in which you are in a trial work period (see
Sec. 404.1592 of this chapter), or if you are statutorily blind as
defined in Sec. 404.1581 of this chapter, we will consider the
following as fulfilling this requirement--
(i) Gross earnings from employment, before any SSI income
exclusions or deductions for impairment related work expenses under
Sec. 404.1576 of this chapter, that are more than the SGA threshold
amount for non-blind beneficiaries in Sec. 404.1574(b)(2) of this
chapter; or
(ii) Net earnings from self-employment (as defined in
Sec. 416.1110(b) of this chapter), before any SSI income exclusions or
deductions for impairment related work expenses under Sec. 404.1576 of
this chapter, that are more than the SGA threshold amount for non-blind
beneficiaries in Sec. 404.1574(b)(2) of this chapter.
Note to paragraph (c)(1): If you worked in one or more months
during the initial 24-month period at the level of work described in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, those months of work may be used
to meet certain requirements of the 24-month progress review as
explained in Sec. 411.180(c)(1) and the work requirements for the
first 12-month progress review period as explained in
Sec. 411.180(c)(2).
(2) During your third 12-month progress review period, and during
later 12-month progress review periods, we will consider you to be
working in a month in which you have earnings from employment or self-
employment sufficient to preclude the payment of Social Security
disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits for a month.
Sec. 411.190 How is it determined if I am meeting the timely progress
guidelines?
(a) During the initial 24-month period.
(1) General. During the initial 24-month period after you assign
your ticket, you must be actively participating in your employment
plan, as defined in Sec. 411.180(c)(1). Active participation in your
employment plan will be presumed unless you or your EN or State VR
agency tell the program manager (PM) that you are not actively
participating. (See Sec. 411.115(k) for a definition of the PM.) If you
or your EN or State VR agency report to the PM that you are temporarily
unable to participate or are not actively participating in your
employment plan during the initial 24-month period after you assign
your ticket, the PM will give you the choice of placing your ticket in
inactive status or resuming active participation in your employment
plan.
(2) Inactive status. If you choose to place the ticket in inactive
status, your ticket will be placed in inactive status beginning with
the first day of the month following the month in which you make your
request. You are not considered to be using a ticket during months in
which your ticket is in inactive status. Therefore, you will be subject
to continuing disability reviews during those months. The months in
which your ticket is in inactive status do not count toward the time
limitations for making timely progress toward self-supporting
employment. You may not place your ticket in inactive status after the
initial 24-month period.
(i) To place a ticket in inactive status, you must submit a written
request to the PM asking that your ticket be placed in inactive status.
The request must include a statement from your EN or State VR agency
that you will not be participating in your plan or receiving services
from them during the period of inactive status.
(ii) If your ticket is still assigned to an EN or State VR agency,
you may reactivate your ticket and return to in-use status at any time
by submitting a written request to the PM. Your ticket will be
reactivated beginning with the first day of the month following the
month in which the PM receives your request.
(3) Resuming active participation. If you choose to resume active
participation in your employment plan, you will be allowed three months
to demonstrate this active participation to the PM. During this period,
you will be considered to be making timely progress toward self-
supporting employment, and these months will count toward your initial
24-month period. The PM will contact your EN or State VR agency after
the three months to determine whether you have been actively
participating in your employment plan during these three months. If the
EN or State VR agency reports that you have been actively participating
in your employment plan during these three months, you will continue to
be considered to be making timely progress toward self-supporting
employment. If the EN or State VR agency reports that you have not been
actively participating in your employment plan during these three
months, the PM will find that you are no longer making timely progress
toward self-supporting employment. The PM will send a written notice of
this decision to you at your last known address. The notice will
explain the reasons for the decision and inform you of the right to ask
us to review the decision. The decision will become effective 30 days
after the date on which the PM sends the notice of the decision to you,
unless you request that we review the decision under Sec. 411.205.
(b) After the initial 24-month period. (1) After the initial 24-
month period, the PM will conduct progress reviews to determine if you
are meeting the timely progress guidelines for continuing to be
considered to be using a ticket.
(2) The PM will conduct a 24-month progress review at the end of
the initial 24-month period. (See Sec. 411.195.)
(3) If you successfully complete your 24-month progress review, the
PM will then conduct 12-month progress reviews at the end of each 12-
month progress review period. (See Sec. 411.200.)
Sec. 411.191 Table summarizing the guidelines for timely progress
toward self-supporting employment.
You may use the following table as a general guide to determine
what you need to do to meet the guidelines for timely progress toward
self-supporting employment. For more detail, refer to Secs. 411.180-
411.190, and Secs. 411.195 and 411.200.
[[Page 67429]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the end of the
If you: You are in this You must work: With this level of period we will
period: earnings: conduct your:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) First assigned your ticket Initial 24-month No work Not applicable.... 24-month progress
less than 24 months ago (not period. requirement. Must review.
counting any months during be actively
which your ticket was participating in
unassigned or was not in use). employment plan.
(b) First assigned your ticket First 12-month 3 months out of 12 Earnings at the First 12-month
25 to 36 months ago, not progress review \2\. SGA level for non- progress review.
counting certain months \1\. period. blind
beneficiaries; \3
\ or If you are
an SSI-only
beneficiary,
gross earnings
from employment
or net earnings
from self-
employment which,
before SSI income
exclusions, are
more than the SGA
threshold amount
for non-blind
beneficiaries.
(c) First assigned your ticket Second 12-month 6 months out of 12 Earnings at the Second 12-month
37 to 48 months ago, not progress review SGA level for non- progress review.
counting certain months \1\. period. blind
beneficiaries; \2
\ or If you are
an SSI-only
beneficiary,
gross earnings
from employment
or net earnings
from self-
employment which,
before SSI income
exclusions, are
more than the SGA
threshold amount
for non-blind
beneficiaries.
(d) First assigned your ticket Third 12-month 6 months out of 12 Earnings Third 12-month
49 to 60 months ago, not progress review sufficient to progress review.
counting certain months \3\. period. preclude Social
Security
disability and
Federal SSI cash
benefits for a
month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note to table: In later 12-month progress review periods, the work and earnings requirements are the same as in
the third 12-month progress review period.
\1\ In counting the 24 months which make up the initial 24-month period that begins after you assign your
ticket, we do not count any months during which your ticket was unassigned or was not in use (see Sec.
411.180(b)(1)). In counting the 12 months which make up any subsequent 12-month progress revieww period, we do
not count any months during which your ticket was unassigned (see Sec. 411.180(b)(2)).
\2\ If you worked in one or more months during the initial 24-month period at the level of work applicable to
the work requirement for the first 12-month progress review period, each such month of work may be used to
reduce by one month the number of months of work required for the first 12-month progress review period (see
Sec. 411.180(c)(2)).
\3\ For an explanation of how we determine if you meet this requirement if you are in a trial work period or if
you are blind, see Sec. 411.185(a)(1) or (c)(1).
Sec. 411.195 How will the PM conduct my 24-month progress review?
(a) In this review the PM will consider the following:
(1) Are you actively participating in your employment plan? By
``actively participating in your employment plan,'' we mean that you
are engaging in activities outlined in your employment plan on a
regular basis and in the approximate time frames specified in the plan.
These activities may include employment, if agreed to in the employment
plan.
(2) Does your employment plan have a goal of at least three months
of work (as defined in Sec. 411.185) by the time of your first 12-month
progress review?
(3) Given your current progress in your employment plan, can you
reasonably be expected to reach this goal of at least three months of
work (as defined in Sec. 411.185) at the time of your first 12-month
progress review?
Note to paragraph (a): If you worked in one or more months
during the initial 24-month period at the level of work applicable
to the work requirement for the first 12-month progress review
period, each such month of work may be used to reduce by one month
the number of months of work referred to in paragraphs (a)(2) and
(3) of this section and the number of months of work required for
the first 12-month progress review period (see Sec. 411.180(c)(1)
and (2)).
(b) If the answer to all three of these questions is yes, the PM
will find that you are making timely progress toward self-supporting
employment. We will consider you to be making timely progress toward
self-supporting employment until your first 12-month progress review.
(c) If the answer to any of these questions is no, the PM will find
that you are not making timely progress toward self-supporting
employment. The PM will send a written notice of the decision to you at
your last known address. The notice will explain the reasons for the
decision and inform you of the right to ask us to review the decision.
The decision will be effective 30 days after the date on which the PM
sends the notice of the decision to you, unless you request that we
review the decision under Sec. 411.205.
[[Page 67430]]
Sec. 411.200 How will the PM conduct my 12-month progress reviews?
(a) The 12-month progress review is a two step process:
(1) Step one--Retrospective review. Did you complete the work
requirements (as specified in Sec. 411.180 and Sec. 411.185) in the
just completed 12-month progress review period?
(i) If you have not completed the work requirements, the PM will
find that you are not making timely progress toward self-supporting
employment.
(ii) If you have completed the work requirements, the PM will go to
step two.
(2) Step two--Anticipated work level. Do both you and your EN or
State VR agency expect that you will work at the level required during
the next 12-month progress review period?
(i) If not, the PM will find that you are not making timely
progress toward self-supporting employment.
(ii) If so, the PM will find that you are making timely progress
toward self-supporting employment. We will consider you to be making
timely progress toward self-supporting employment until your next 12-
month progress review.
(b) If the PM finds that you are not making timely progress toward
self-supporting employment, the PM will send a written notice of the
decision to you at your last known address. The notice will explain the
reasons for the decision and inform you of the right to ask us to
review the decision. The decision will be effective 30 days after the
date on which the PM sends the notice of the decision to you, unless
you request that we review the decision under Sec. 411.205.
Sec. 411.205 What if I disagree with the PM's decision about whether I
am making timely progress toward self-supporting employment?
If you disagree with the PM's decision, you may request that we
review the decision. You must make the request before the 30th day
after the date on which the PM sends the notice of its decision to you.
We will consider you to be making timely progress toward self-
supporting employment until we make a decision. We will send a written
notice of our decision to you at your last known address. If we decide
that you are no longer making timely progress toward self-supporting
employment, our decision will be effective on the date on which we send
the notice of the decision to you.
Failure To Make Timely Progress
Sec. 411.21 What happens if I do not make timely progress toward self-
supporting employment?
(a) General. If it is determined that you are not making timely
progress toward self-supporting employment, we will find that you are
no longer using a ticket. If this happens, you will once again be
subject to continuing disability reviews. However, you may continue
participating in the Ticket to Work program. Your EN (including a State
VR agency which is serving you as an EN) also may receive any milestone
or outcome payments for which it is eligible under Sec. 411.500 et seq.
If you are working with a State VR agency which elected payment under
the cost reimbursement payment system, your State VR agency may receive
payment for which it is eligible under the cost reimbursement payment
system (see subparts F and H of this part).
(b) Re-entering in-use status. If you failed to meet the timely
progress guidelines for continuing to use a ticket, you may re-enter
in-use status. If you believe that you meet the requirements for re-
entering in-use status described in paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3),
(b)(4) or (b)(5) of this section, you may request that you be
reinstated to in-use status. You must submit a written request to the
PM asking that you be reinstated to in-use status. The PM will decide
whether you have satisfied the applicable requirements for re-entering
in-use status. The requirements for re-entering in-use status depend on
how far you progressed before you failed to meet the timely progress
guidelines.
(1) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines during the
initial 24-month period.
(i) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines during the
initial 24-month period, you may re-enter in-use status by
demonstrating three consecutive months of active participation in your
employment plan (see Sec. 411.166(a)).
(ii) When you have satisfied this requirement, you will be
reinstated to in-use status, provided that your ticket is assigned to
an EN or State VR agency. See paragraph (c) of this section for when
your reinstatement to in-use status will be effective.
(iii) After you are reinstated to in-use status, your next review
will be the 24-month progress review described in Sec. 411.195.
(2) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines in your
24-month progress review.
(i) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines in your
24-month progress review, you may re-enter in-use status by completing
three months of work (as defined in Sec. 411.185(a)(1), (b)(1) or
(c)(1)) within a rolling 12-month period. The rolling 12-month period
must begin after the effective date of the decision that you failed to
meet the timely progress guidelines. You also must satisfy the test of
Sec. 411.200(a)(2) regarding the anticipated level of your work during
the 12-month progress review period that may begin under paragraph
(b)(2)(iii) of this section. The work requirements for this 12-month
progress review period will be the work requirements applicable during
the second 12-month progress review period.
(ii) When you have satisfied these requirements, you will be
reinstated to in-use status, provided that your ticket is assigned to
an EN or State VR agency. See paragraph (c) of this section for when
your reinstatement to in-use status will be effective.
(iii) After you are reinstated to in-use status, the second 12-
month progress review period will begin. During this 12-month progress
review period, you will be required to work (as defined in
Sec. 411.185(a)(1), (b)(1) or (c)(1)) at least six months. The PM will
conduct a 12-month progress review at the end of this 12-month progress
review period to determine if you have met this requirement. After
this, the PM will conduct 12-month progress reviews in the usual
manner.
(3) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines in your
first 12-month progress review.
(i) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines in your
first 12-month progress review, you may re-enter in-use status by
completing three months of work (as defined in Sec. 411.185(a)(1),
(b)(1) or (c)(1)) within a rolling 12-month period. The rolling 12-
month period must begin after the effective date of the decision that
you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines. You also must
satisfy the test of Sec. 411.200(a)(2) regarding the anticipated level
of your work during the next 12-month progress review period that may
begin under paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this section.
(ii) When you have satisfied these requirements, you will be
reinstated to in-use status, provided that your ticket is assigned to
an EN or State VR agency. See paragraph (c) of this section for when
your reinstatement to in-use status will be effective.
(iii) After you are reinstated to in-use status, your next 12-month
progress review period will begin. During this 12-month progress review
period, you will be required to work (as defined in
[[Page 67431]]
Sec. 411.185(a)(1), (b)(1) or (c)(1)) at least six months. The PM will
conduct a 12-month progress review at the end of this 12-month progress
review period to determine if you have met this requirement. After
this, the PM will conduct 12-month progress reviews in the usual
manner.
(4) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines in your
second 12-month progress review.
(i) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines in your
second 12-month progress review, you may re-enter in-use status by
completing six months of work (as defined in Sec. 411.185(a)(1), (b)(1)
or (c)(1)) within a rolling 12-month period. The rolling 12-month
period must begin after the effective date of the decision that you
failed to meet the timely progress guidelines. You also must satisfy
the test of Sec. 411.200(a)(2) regarding the anticipated level of your
work during the next 12-month progress review period that may begin
under paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of this section.
(ii) When you have satisfied these requirements, you will be
reinstated to in-use status, provided that your ticket is assigned to
an EN or State VR agency. See paragraph (c) of this section for when
your reinstatement to in-use status will be effective.
(iii) After you are reinstated to in-use status, your next 12-month
progress review period will begin. During this 12-month progress review
period, you will be required to work (as defined in Sec. 411.185(a)(2),
(b)(2) or (c)(2)) at least six months. The PM will conduct a 12-month
progress review at the end of this 12-month progress review period to
determine if you have met this requirement. After this, the PM will
conduct 12-month progress reviews in the usual manner.
(5) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines in any
progress review after your second 12-month progress review.
(i) If you failed to meet the timely progress guidelines in any
progress review after your second 12-month progress review, you may re-
enter in-use status by completing six months of work within a rolling
12-month period with earnings in each of the six months at the level
specified in Sec. 411.185(a)(2), (b)(2) or (c)(2). The rolling 12-month
period must begin after the effective date of the decision that you
failed to meet the timely progress guidelines. You also must satisfy
the test in Sec. 411.200(a)(2) regarding the anticipated level of your
work during the next 12-month progress review period that may begin
under paragraph (b)(5)(iii) of this section.
(ii) When you have satisfied these requirements, you will be
reinstated to in-use status, provided that your ticket is assigned to
an EN or State VR agency. See paragraph (c) of this section for when
your reinstatement to in-use status will be effective.
(iii) After you are reinstated to in-use status, your next 12-month
progress review period will begin. During this 12-month progress review
period, you will be required to work at least six months with earnings
at the level specified in Sec. 411.185(a)(2), (b)(2) or (c)(2). The PM
will conduct a 12-month progress review at the end of this 12-month
progress review period to determine if you have met this requirement.
After this, the PM will conduct 12-month progress reviews in the usual
manner.
(c) Decisions on whether you have satisfied the requirements for
re-entering in-use status.
(1) After you have submitted a written request to the PM asking
that you be reinstated to in-use status, the PM will decide whether you
have satisfied the applicable requirements in this section for re-
entering in-use status. The PM will send a written notice of the
decision to you at your last known address. The notice will explain the
reasons for the decision and inform you of the right to ask us to
review the decision. If the PM decides that you have satisfied the
requirements for re-entering in-use status (including the requirement
that your ticket be assigned to an EN or State VR agency), you will be
reinstated to in-use status effective with the date on which the PM
sends the notice of the decision to you. If the PM decides that you
have not satisfied the requirements for re-entering in-use status, you
may request that we review the decision under paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.
(2) If you disagree with the PM's decision, you may request that we
review the decision. You must make the request before the 30th day
after the date on which the PM sends the notice of its decision to you.
We will send you a written notice of our decision at your last known
address. If we decide that you have satisfied the requirements for re-
entering in-use status (including the requirement that your ticket be
assigned to an EN or State VR agency), you will be reinstated to in-use
status effective with the date on which we send the notice of the
decision to you.
The Extension Period
Sec. 411.220 What if my ticket is no longer assigned to an EN or State
VR agency?
(a) If your ticket was once assigned to an EN or State VR agency
and is no longer assigned, you are eligible for an extension period of
up to three months to reassign your ticket. You are eligible for an
extension period if your ticket is in use and no longer assigned
because--
(1) You retrieved your ticket because you were dissatisfied with
the services being provided (see Sec. 411.145(a)) or because you
relocated to an area not served by your previous EN or State VR agency;
or
(2) Your EN went out of business, is no longer approved to
participate as an EN in the Ticket to Work program, or is no longer
willing or able to provide you with services as described in
Sec. 411.145(b), or your State VR agency stopped providing services to
you as described in Sec. 411.145(b).
(b) During the extension period, the ticket will still be
considered to be in use. This means that you will not be subject to
continuing disability reviews during this period.
(c) Time spent in the extension period will not count toward the
time limitations for the timely progress guidelines.
(d) The extension period--
(1) Begins on the first day on which the ticket is no longer
assigned (see Sec. 411.145); and
(2) Ends three months after it begins or when you assign your
ticket to a new EN or State VR agency, whichever is sooner.
(e) If your extension period began during the initial 24-month
period, and you reassign your ticket to an EN or State VR agency (other
than the EN or State VR agency to which the ticket was previously
assigned), you will have a new initial 24-month period when you
reassign your ticket. This initial 24-month period will begin with the
first month beginning after the day on which the reassignment of your
ticket is effective under Sec. 411.150(c).
(f) If you do not assign your ticket by the end of the extension
period, the ticket will no longer be in use and you will once again be
subject to continuing disability reviews.
Sec. 411.225 What if I reassign my ticket after the end of the
extension period?
(a) General. You may reassign your ticket after the end of the
extension period under the conditions described in Sec. 411.150. If you
reassign your ticket after the end of the extension period, you will be
reinstated to in-use status beginning on the day on which the
reassignment of your ticket is effective under Sec. 411.150(c).
(b) Time limitations for the timely progress guidelines. Any month
during which your ticket is not assigned, either during or after the
extension period,
[[Page 67432]]
will not count toward the time limitations for the timely progress
guidelines. See Sec. 411.180(b)(1) and (2).
(c) If your extension period began during the initial 24-month
period. If your extension period began during the initial 24-month
period, and you reassign your ticket to an EN or State VR agency (other
than the EN or State VR agency to which the ticket was previously
assigned), you will have a new initial 24-month period when you
reassign your ticket. This initial 24-month period will begin with the
first month beginning after the day on which the reassignment of your
ticket is effective under Sec. 411.150(c).
(d) If your extension period began during any 12-month progress
review period. If your extension period began during a 12-month
progress review period and you reassign your ticket after the end of
the extension period, the period comprising the remaining months in
that 12-month progress review period (see Sec. 411.180(b)(2)) will
begin with the first month beginning after the day on which the
reassignment of your ticket is effective under Sec. 411.150(c).
Subpart D--Use of One or More Program Managers To Assist in
Administration of the Ticket to Work Program
Sec. 411.230 What is a PM?
A program manager (PM) is an organization in the private or public
sector that has entered into a contract to assist us in administering
the Ticket to Work program. We will use a competitive bidding process
to select one or more PMs.
Sec. 411.235 What qualifications are required of a PM?
A PM must have expertise and experience in the field of vocational
rehabilitation or employment services.
Sec. 411.240 What limitations are placed on a PM?
A PM is prohibited from directly participating in the delivery of
employment services, vocational rehabilitation services, or other
support services to beneficiaries with tickets in the PM's designated
service delivery area. A PM is also prohibited from holding a financial
interest in an employment network (EN) or service provider that
provides services under the Ticket to Work program in the PM's
designated service delivery area.
Sec. 411.245 What are a PM's responsibilities under the Ticket to Work
program?
A PM will assist us in administering the Ticket to Work program by
conducting the following activities:
(a) Recruiting, recommending, and monitoring ENs. A PM must recruit
and recommend for selection by us public and private entities to
function as ENs under the program. A PM is also responsible for
monitoring the ENs operating in its service delivery area. Such
monitoring must be done to the extent necessary and appropriate to
ensure that adequate choices of services are made available to
beneficiaries with tickets. A PM may not limit the number of public or
private entities being recommended to function as ENs.
(b) Facilitating access by beneficiaries to ENs. A PM must assist
beneficiaries with tickets in accessing ENs.
(1) A PM must establish and maintain lists of the ENs available to
beneficiaries with tickets in its service delivery area and make these
lists generally available to the public.
(2) A PM must ensure that all information provided to beneficiaries
with tickets about ENs is in accessible formats. For purposes of this
section, accessible format means by media that is appropriate to a
particular beneficiary's impairment(s).
(3) A PM must take necessary measures to ensure that sufficient ENs
are available and that each beneficiary under the Ticket to Work
program has reasonable access to employment services, vocational
rehabilitation services, and other support services. The PM shall
ensure that services such as the following are available in each
service area, including rural areas: case management, work incentives
planning, supported employment, career planning, career plan
development, vocational assessment, job training, placement, follow-up
services, and other services that we may require in an agreement with a
PM.
(4) A PM must ensure that each beneficiary with a ticket is allowed
to change ENs. When a change in the EN occurs, the PM must reassign the
ticket based on the choice of the beneficiary.
(c) Facilitating payments to ENs. A PM must facilitate payments to
the ENs in its service delivery area. Subpart H explains the EN payment
systems and the PM's role in administering these systems.
(1) A PM must maintain documentation and provide regular assurances
to us that payments to an EN are warranted. The PM shall ensure that an
EN is complying with the terms of its agreement and applicable
regulations.
(2) Upon the request of an EN, the PM shall make a determination of
the allocation of the outcome or milestone payments due to an EN based
on the services provided by the EN when a beneficiary has been served
by more than one EN.
(d) Administrative requirements. A PM will perform such
administrative tasks as are required to assist us in administering and
implementing the Ticket to Work program. Administrative tasks required
for the implementation of the Program may include, but are not limited
to:
(1) Reviewing individual work plans (IWPs) submitted by ENs for
ticket assignment. These reviews will be conducted to ensure that the
IWPs meet the requirements of Sec. 411.465. (The PM will not review
individualized plans for employment developed by State VR agencies and
beneficiaries.)
(2) Reviewing amendments to IWPs to ensure that the amendments meet
the requirements in Sec. 411.465.
(3) Ensuring that ENs only refer an individual to a State VR agency
for services pursuant to an agreement regarding the conditions under
which such services will be provided.
(4) Resolving a dispute between an EN and a State VR agency with
respect to agreements regarding the conditions under which services
will be provided when an individual is referred by an EN to a State VR
agency for services.
Evaluation of Program Manager Performance
Sec. 411.250 How will SSA evaluate a PM?
(a) We will periodically conduct a formal evaluation of the PM. The
evaluation will include, but not be limited to, an assessment examining
the following areas:
(1) Quality of services;
(2) Cost control;
(3) Timeliness of performance;
(4) Business relations; and
(5) Customer satisfaction.
(b) Our Project Officer will perform the evaluation. The PM will
have an opportunity to comment on the evaluation, and then the
Contracting Officer will determine the PM's final rating.
(c) These performance evaluations will be made part of our database
on contractor past performance to which any Federal agency may have
access.
(d) Failure to comply with the standards used in the evaluation may
result in early termination of our agreement with the PM.
[[Page 67433]]
Subpart E--Employment Networks
Sec. 411.300 What is an EN?
An employment network (EN) is any qualified entity that has entered
into an agreement with us to function as an EN under the Ticket to Work
program and assume responsibility for the coordination and delivery of
employment services, vocational rehabilitation services, or other
support services to beneficiaries who have assigned their tickets to
that EN.
Sec. 411.305 Who is eligible to be an EN?
Any qualified agency or instrumentality of a State (or political
subdivision thereof) or a private entity that assumes responsibility
for the coordination and delivery of services under the Ticket to Work
program to disabled beneficiaries is eligible to be an EN. A single
entity or an association of or consortium of entities combining their
resources is eligible to be an EN. The entity may provide these
services directly or by entering into an agreement with other
organizations or individuals to provide the appropriate services or
other assistance that a beneficiary with a ticket may need to find and
maintain employment that reduces dependency on disability benefits. ENs
may include, but are not limited to:
(a) Any public or private entity, including charitable and
religious organizations, that can provide directly, or arrange for
other organizations or entities to provide, employment services,
vocational rehabilitation services, or other support services.
(b) State agencies administering or supervising the administration
of the State plan approved under title I of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.) may choose, on a case-by-case
basis, to be paid as an EN under the payment systems described in
subpart H of this part. For the rules on State VR agencies'
participation in the Ticket to Work program, see subpart F of this
part. The rules in this subpart E apply to entities other than State VR
agencies.
(c) One-stop delivery systems established under subtitle B of title
I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2841 et seq.).
(d) Alternate participants currently operating under the authority
of section 222(d)(2) of the Social Security Act.
(e) Organizations administering Vocational Rehabilitation Services
Projects for American Indians with Disabilities authorized under
section 121 of part C of title I of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 750 et seq.).
(f) Public or private schools that provide VR or employment
services, conduct job training programs, or make services or programs
available that can assist students with disabilities in acquiring
specific job skills that lead to employment. This includes transition
programs that can help students acquire work skills.
(g) Employers that offer job training or other support services or
assistance to help individuals with disabilities obtain and retain
employment or arrange for individuals with disabilities to receive
relevant services or assistance.
Sec. 411.310 How does an entity other than a State VR agency apply to
be an EN and who will determine whether an entity qualifies as an EN?
(a) An entity other than a State VR agency applies by responding to
our Request for Proposal (RFP), which we published in the Commerce
Business Daily and which is available online through the Federal
government's electronic posting system (http://www.eps.gov). This RFP
also is available through SSA's website, http://www.ssa.gov/work. Since
recruitment of ENs will be an ongoing process, the RFP is open and
continuous. The entity must respond in a format prescribed in the RFP
announcement. In its response, the entity must assure SSA that it is
qualified to provide employment services, vocational rehabilitation
services, or other support services to disabled beneficiaries, either
directly or through arrangements with other entities.
(b) The PM will solicit service providers and other qualified
entities to respond to the RFP on an ongoing basis. (See
Sec. 411.115(k) for a definition of the PM.) The PM will conduct a
preliminary review of responses to the RFP from applicants located in
the PM's service delivery area and make recommendations to the
Commissioner regarding selection. The Commissioner will decide which
applicants will be approved to serve as ENs under the program.
(c) State VR agencies must comply with the requirements in subpart
F of this part to participate as an EN in the Ticket to Work program.
(See Secs. 411.360ff).
Sec. 411.315 What are the minimum qualifications necessary to be an
EN?
To serve as an EN under the Ticket to Work program, an entity must
meet and maintain compliance with both general selection criteria and
specific selection criteria.
(a) The general criteria include:
(1) having systems in place to protect the confidentiality of
personal information about beneficiaries seeking or receiving services;
(2) being accessible, both physically and programmatically, to
beneficiaries seeking or receiving services (examples of being
programmatically accessible include the capability of making documents
and literature available in alternate media including Braille, recorded
formats, enlarged print, and electronic media; and insuring that data
systems available to clients are fully accessible for independent use
by persons with disabilities);
(3) not discriminating in the provision of services based on a
beneficiary's age, gender, race, color, creed, or national origin;
(4) having adequate resources to perform the activities required
under the agreement with us or the ability to obtain them;
(5) complying with the terms and conditions in the agreement with
us, including delivering or coordinating the delivery of employment
services, vocational rehabilitation services, and other support
services; and
(6) implementing accounting procedures and control operations
necessary to carry out the Ticket to Work program.
(b) 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 including certification or accreditation by national
accrediting or certifying organizations; or
(ii) Using staff that are otherwise qualified based on education or
experience, such as by using staff with experience or a college degree
in a field related to the services the EN wants to provide, such as
vocational counseling, human relations, teaching, or psychology; and
(2) Taking reasonable steps to assure that if any medical and
related health services are provided, such medical and health related
services are provided 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) Any entity must have applicable certificates, licenses or other
credentials if such documentation is required by State law to provide
vocational rehabilitation services, employment services or other
support services.
(d) We will not use the following as an EN:
(1) any entity that has had its license, accreditation,
certification, or registration suspended or revoked for reasons
concerning professional
[[Page 67434]]
competence or conduct or financial integrity;
(2) any entity that has surrendered a license, accreditation,
certification, or registration with a disciplinary proceeding pending;
or
(3) any entity that is precluded from Federal procurement or non-
procurement programs.
Sec. 411.320 What are an EN's responsibilities as a participant in the
Ticket to Work program?
An EN must--
(a) Enter into an agreement with us.
(b) Serve a prescribed service area. The EN must designate the
geographic area in which it will provide services. This will be
designated in the EN's agreement with us.
(c) Provide services directly, or enter into agreements with other
entities to provide employment services, vocational rehabilitation
services, or other support services to beneficiaries with tickets.
(d) Ensure that employment services, vocational rehabilitation
services, and other support services provided under the Ticket to Work
program are provided under appropriate individual work plans (IWPs).
(e) Elect a payment system at the time of signing an agreement with
us (see Sec. 411.505).
(f) Develop and implement each IWP in partnership with each
beneficiary receiving services in a manner that affords the beneficiary
the opportunity to exercise informed choice in selecting an employment
goal and specific services needed to achieve that employment goal. Each
IWP must meet the requirements described in Sec. 411.465.
Sec. 411.321 Under what conditions will SSA terminate an agreement
with an EN due to inadequate performance?
We will terminate our agreement with an EN if it does not comply
with the requirements under Secs. 411.320, Sec. 411.325, or the
conditions in the agreement between SSA and the EN, including minimum
performance standards relating to beneficiaries achieving self-
supporting employment and leaving the benefit rolls.
Sec. 411.325 What reporting requirements are placed on an EN as a
participant in the Ticket to Work program?
An EN must:
(a) Report to the PM each time it accepts a ticket for assignment;
(b) Submit a copy of each signed IWP to the PM;
(c) Submit to the PM copies of amendments to a beneficiary's IWP;
(d) Submit to the PM a copy of any agreement the EN has established
with a State VR agency regarding the conditions under which the State
VR agency will provide services to beneficiaries who are referred by
the EN under the Ticket to Work program;
(e) Submit information to assist the PM conducting the reviews
necessary to assess a beneficiary's timely progress towards self-
supporting employment to determine if a beneficiary is using a ticket
for purposes of suspending continuing disability reviews (see subpart C
of this part);
(f) Report to the PM the specific outcomes achieved with respect to
specific services the EN provided or secured on behalf of beneficiaries
whose tickets it accepted for assignment. Such reports shall conform to
a national model prescribed by us and shall be submitted to the PM at
least annually;
(g) Provide a copy of its most recent annual report on outcomes to
each beneficiary considering assigning a ticket to it and assure that a
copy of its most recent report is available to the public while
ensuring that personal information on beneficiaries is kept
confidential;
(h) Meet our financial reporting requirements. These requirements
will be described in the agreements between ENs and the Commissioner,
and will include submitting a financial report to the program manager
on an annual basis;
(i) Collect and record such data as we shall require, in a form
prescribed by us; and
(j) Adhere to all requirements specified in the agreement with the
Commissioner and all regulatory requirements in this part 411.
Sec. 411.330 How will SSA evaluate an EN's performance?
(a) We will periodically review the results of the work of each EN
to ensure effective quality assurance in the provision of services by
ENs.
(b) In conducting such a review, we will solicit and consider the
views of the individuals the EN serves and the PM which monitors the
EN.
(c) ENs must make the results of these periodic reviews available
to disabled beneficiaries to assist them in choosing among available
ENs.
Subpart F--State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies' Participation
Participation in the Ticket to Work Program
Sec. 411.350 Must a State VR agency participate in the Ticket to Work
program?
Yes. Each State agency administering or supervising the
administration of the State plan approved under title I of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), must
participate in the Ticket to Work program if it wishes to receive
payments from SSA for serving disabled beneficiaries who are issued a
ticket.
Sec. 411.355 What payment options does a State VR agency have under
the Ticket to Work program?
(a) The Ticket to Work program provides different payment options
that are available to a State VR agency for providing services to
disabled beneficiaries who have a ticket. A State VR agency
participates in the program in one of two ways when providing services
to a particular disabled beneficiary under the program. On a case-by-
case basis, subject to the limitations in Sec. 411.585, the State VR
agency may participate either--
(1) As an employment network (EN); or
(2) Under the cost reimbursement payment system (see subpart V of
part 404 and subpart V of part 416 of this chapter).
(b) When the State VR agency serves a beneficiary with a ticket as
an EN, the State VR agency will use the EN payment system it has
elected for this purpose, either the outcome payment system or the
outcome-milestone payment system (described in subpart H of this part).
The State VR agency will have periodic opportunities to change the
payment system it uses when serving as an EN.
(c) The State VR agency may seek payment only under its elected EN
payment system whenever it serves as an EN. When serving a beneficiary
who was not issued a ticket, the State VR agency may seek payment only
under the cost reimbursement payment system.
(d) A State VR agency can choose to function as an EN or to receive
payment under the cost reimbursement payment system each time that a
ticket is assigned or reassigned to it if payment has not previously
been made with respect to that ticket. If payment has previously been
made with respect to that ticket, the State VR agency can receive
payment only under the payment system under which the earlier payment
was made.
Sec. 411.360 How does a State VR agency become an EN?
(a) As the Ticket to Work program is implemented in States, we will
notify the State VR agency by letter about payment systems available
under the program. The letter will ask the State VR agency to choose a
payment system to use when it functions as an EN.
[[Page 67435]]
(b) When serving a beneficiary holding a ticket, the State VR
agency may choose, on a case-by-case basis, to seek payment under its
elected EN payment system or under the cost reimbursement payment
system, subject to the limitations in Sec. 411.585.
Sec. 411.365 How does a State VR agency notify SSA about its choice of
a payment system for use when functioning as an EN?
(a) When the State VR agency receives our letter described in
Sec. 411.360(a) regarding implementation of the Ticket to Work program,
the State VR agency must respond by sending us a letter telling us
which EN payment system it will use when it functions as an EN with
respect to a beneficiary who has a ticket.
(b) The director of the State agency administering or supervising
the administration of the State plan approved under title I of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), or the
director's designee must sign the State VR agency's letter described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
Sec. 411.370 Does a State VR agency ever have to function as an EN?
A State VR agency does not have to function as an EN when serving a
beneficiary with a ticket if the ticket has not previously been
assigned to an EN or State VR agency or, if it has been previously
assigned, we have not made payment under an EN payment system with
respect to that ticket. However, as described in Sec. 411.585(b), a
State VR agency is precluded from being paid under the cost
reimbursement payment system if an EN or a State VR agency serving a
beneficiary as an EN has been paid by us under one of the EN payment
systems with respect to the same ticket.
Sec. 411.375 Does a State VR agency continue to provide services under
the requirements of the State plan approved under title I of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), when
functioning as an EN?
Yes. The State VR agency must continue to provide services under
the requirements of the State plan approved under title I of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 720 et seq.), even
when functioning as an EN.
Ticket Status
Sec. 411.380 What does a State VR agency do if the State VR agency
wants to determine whether a person seeking services has a ticket?
A State VR agency can contact the Program Manager (PM) to determine
if a person seeking VR services has a ticket and, if so, whether the
ticket may be assigned to the State VR agency (see Sec. 411.140) or
reassigned to the State VR agency (see Sec. 411.150). (See
Sec. 411.115(k) for a definition of the PM.)
Sec. 411.385 What does a State VR agency do if a beneficiary who is
eligible for VR services has a ticket that is available for assignment
or reassignment?
(a) Once the State VR agency determines that a beneficiary is
eligible for VR services, the beneficiary and a representative of the
State VR agency must agree to and sign the individualized plan for
employment (IPE) required under section 102(b) of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 722(b)). This requirement must be
met in order for a beneficiary to assign or reassign his or her ticket
to the State VR agency. Section 411.140(d) describes the other
requirements which must be met in order for a beneficiary to assign a
ticket. Section 411.150(a) and (b) describe the other requirements
which must be met in order for a beneficiary to reassign a ticket.
Under Sec. 411.140(d)(3) and Sec. 411.150(b)(4), the State VR agency
must submit the following information to the PM in order for the
beneficiary's ticket to be assigned or reassigned to the State VR
AGENCY:
(1) A statement that the beneficiary has decided to assign or
reassign the ticket to the State VR agency and that an IPE has been
agreed to and signed by both the beneficiary and a representative of
the State VR agency;
(2) A statement of the vocational goal outlined in the
beneficiary's IPE; and
(3) A statement of the State VR agency's selection of the payment
system (either the cost reimbursement payment system or the previously
elected EN payment system) under which the State VR agency will seek
payment for providing services to the beneficiary.
(b) This information must be submitted to the PM in a format
prescribed by us and must include the signatures of both the
beneficiary, or a representative of the beneficiary, and a
representative of the State VR agency.
Sec. 411.390 What does a State VR agency do if a beneficiary to whom
it is already providing services has a ticket that is available for
assignment?
If a beneficiary who is receiving services from the State VR agency
under an existing IPE becomes eligible for a ticket that is available
for assignment and decides to assign the ticket to the State VR agency,
the State VR agency must submit the information required in
Sec. 411.385(a)(1)-(3) and (b) to the PM. This requirement must be met
in order for the beneficiary to assign his or her ticket to the State
VR agency. Section 411.140(d) describes the other requirements which
must be met in order for a beneficiary to assign a ticket.
Sec. 411.395 Is a State VR agency required to provide periodic
reports?
(a) For cases where a State VR agency provided services functioning
as an EN, the State VR agency will be required to prepare periodic
reports on the specific outcomes achieved with respect to the specific
services the State VR agency provided to or secured for disabled
beneficiaries whose tickets it accepted for assignment. These reports
must be submitted to the PM at least annually.
(b) Regardless of the payment method selected, a State VR agency
must submit information to assist the PM conducting the reviews
necessary to assess a beneficiary's timely progress toward self-
supporting employment to determine if a beneficiary is using a ticket
for purposes of suspending continuing disability reviews (see
Secs. 411.190, 411.195 and 411.200).
Referrals by Employment Networks to State VR Agencies
Sec. 411.400 Can an EN to which a beneficiary's ticket is assigned
refer the beneficiary to a State VR agency for services?
Yes. An EN may refer a beneficiary it is serving under the Ticket
to Work program to a State VR agency for services. However, a referral
can be made only if the State VR agency and the EN have an agreement
that specifies the conditions under which services will be provided by
the State VR agency. This agreement must be in writing and signed by
the State VR agency and the EN prior to the EN referring any
beneficiary to the State VR agency for services.
Agreements Between Employment Networks and State VR Agencies
Sec. 411.405 When does an agreement between an EN and the State VR
agency have to be in place?
Each EN must have an agreement with the State VR agency prior to
referring a beneficiary it is serving under the Ticket to Work program
to the State VR agency for specific services.
Sec. 411.410 Does each referral from an EN to a State VR agency
require its own agreement?
No. The agreements between ENs and State VR agencies should be
broad-based and apply to all beneficiaries who may be referred by the
EN to the State VR agency for services, although an EN and a State VR
agency may want to
[[Page 67436]]
enter into an individualized agreement to meet the needs of a single
beneficiary.
Sec. 411.415 Who will verify the establishment of agreements between
ENs and State VR agencies?
The PM will verify the establishment of these agreements. Each EN
is required to submit a copy of the agreement it has established with
the State VR agency to the PM.
Sec. 411.420 What information should be included in an agreement
between an EN and a State VR agency?
The agreement between an EN and a State VR agency should state the
conditions under which the State VR agency will provide services to a
beneficiary when the beneficiary is referred by the EN to the State VR
agency for services. Examples of this information include-
(a) Procedures for making referrals and sharing information that
will assist in providing services;
(b) A description of the financial responsibilities of each party
to the agreement;
(c) The terms and procedures under which the EN will pay the State
VR agency for providing services; and
(d) Procedures for resolving disputes under the agreement.
Sec. 411.425 What should a State VR agency do if it gets an attempted
referral from an EN and no agreement has been established between the
EN and the State VR agency?
The State VR agency should contact the EN to discuss the need to
establish an agreement. If the State VR agency and the EN are not able
to negotiate acceptable terms for an agreement, the State VR agency
should notify the PM that an attempted referral has been made without
an agreement.
Sec. 411.430 What should the PM do when it is informed that an EN has
attempted to make a referral to a State VR agency without an agreement
being in place?
The PM will contact the EN to explain that a referral cannot be
made to the State VR agency unless an agreement has been established
that sets out the conditions under which services will be provided when
a beneficiary's ticket is assigned to the EN and the EN is referring
the beneficiary to the State VR agency for specific services.
Resolving Disputes Arising Under Agreements Between Employment
Networks and State VR Agencies
Sec. 411.435 How will disputes arising under the agreements between
ENs and State VR agencies be resolved?
Disputes arising under agreements between ENs and State VR agencies
must be resolved using the following steps:
(a) When procedures for resolving disputes are spelled out in the
agreement between the EN and the State VR agency, those procedures must
be used.
(b) If procedures for resolving disputes are not included in the
agreement between the EN and the State VR agency and procedures for
resolving disputes under contracts and interagency agreements are
provided for in State law or administrative procedures, the State
procedures must be used to resolve disputes under agreements between
ENs and State VR agencies.
(c) If procedures for resolving disputes are not spelled out in the
agreement or in State law or administrative procedures, the EN or the
State VR agency may request that the PM recommend a resolution to the
dispute.
(1) The request must be in writing and include:
(i) a copy of the agreement;
(ii) information on the issue(s) in dispute; and
(iii) information on the position of both the EN and the State VR
agency regarding the dispute.
(2) The PM has 20 calendar days after receiving a written request
to recommend a resolution to the dispute. If either the EN or the State
VR agency does not agree with the PM's recommended resolution to the
dispute, the EN or the State VR agency has 30 calendar days after
receiving the PM's recommendation to request a decision by us on the
matter in dispute.
Subpart G--Requirements For Individual Work Plans
Sec. 411.450 What is an Individual Work Plan?
An individual work plan (IWP) is a required written document signed
by an employment network (EN) (other than a State VR agency) and a
beneficiary, or a representative of a beneficiary, with a ticket. It is
developed and implemented in partnership when a beneficiary and an EN
have come to a mutual understanding to work together to pursue the
beneficiary's employment goal under the Ticket to Work program.
Sec. 411.455 What is the purpose of an IWP?
The purpose of an IWP is to outline the specific employment
services, vocational rehabilitation services and other support services
that the EN and beneficiary have determined are necessary to achieve
the beneficiary's stated employment goal. An IWP provides written
documentation for both the EN and beneficiary. Both parties should
develop and implement the IWP in partnership. The EN shall develop and
implement the plan in a manner that gives the beneficiary the
opportunity to exercise informed choice in selecting an employment
goal. Specific services needed to achieve the designated employment
goal are discussed and agreed to by both parties.
Sec. 411.460 Who is responsible for determining what information is
contained in the IWP?
The beneficiary and the EN share the responsibility for determining
the employment goal and the specific services needed to achieve that
employment goal. The EN will present information and options in a way
that affords the beneficiary the opportunity to exercise informed
choice in selecting an employment goal and specific services needed to
achieve that employment goal.
Sec. 411.465 What are the minimum requirements for an IWP?
(a) An IWP must include at least--
(1) A statement of the vocational goal developed with the
beneficiary, including, as appropriate, goals for earnings and job
advancement;
(2) A statement of the services and supports necessary for the
beneficiary to accomplish that goal;
(3) A statement of any terms and conditions related to the
provision of these services and supports;
(4) A statement that the EN may not request or receive any
compensation for the costs of services and supports from the
beneficiary;
(5) A statement of the conditions under which an EN may amend the
IWP or terminate the relationship;
(6) A statement of the beneficiary's rights under the Ticket to
Work program, including the right to retrieve the ticket at any time if
the beneficiary is dissatisfied with the services being provided by the
EN;
(7) A statement of the remedies available to the beneficiary,
including information on the availability of advocacy services and
assistance in resolving disputes through the State Protection and
Advocacy (P&A) System;
(8) A statement of the beneficiary's rights to privacy and
confidentiality regarding personal information, including information
about the beneficiary's disability;
(9) A statement of the beneficiary's right to seek to amend the IWP
(the IWP can be amended if both the beneficiary and the EN agree to the
change); and
(10) A statement of the beneficiary's right to have a copy of the
IWP made
[[Page 67437]]
available to the beneficiary, including in an accessible format chosen
by the beneficiary.
(b) The EN will be responsible for ensuring that each IWP contains
this information.
Sec. 411.470 When does an IWP become effective?
(a) An IWP becomes effective if the following requirements are
met--
(1) It has been signed by the beneficiary or the beneficiary's
representative, and by a representative of the EN;
(2)(i) The beneficiary is eligible to assign his or her ticket
under Sec. 411.140(a); or
(ii) The beneficiary is eligible to reassign his or her ticket
under Sec. 411.150(a) and (b); and
(3) A representative of the EN submits a copy of the signed IWP to
the PM and the PM receives the copy of the IWP.
(b) If all of the requirements in paragraph (a) of this section are
met, the IWP will be effective on the first day on which the
requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section are met.
Subpart H--Employment Network Payment Systems
Sec. 411.500 Definitions of terms used in this subpart.
(a) Payment Calculation Base means for any calendar year--
(1) In connection with a title II disability beneficiary (including
a concurrent title II/title XVI disability beneficiary), the average
monthly disability insurance benefit payable under section 223 of the
Act for months during the preceding calendar year to all beneficiaries
who are in current pay status for the month for which the benefit is
payable; and
(2) In connection with a title XVI disability beneficiary (who is
not concurrently a title II disability beneficiary), the average
monthly payment of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits based on
disability payable under title XVI (excluding State supplementation)
for months during the preceding calendar year to all beneficiaries
who--
(i) Have attained age 18 but have not attained age 65;
(ii) Are not concurrent title II/title XVI beneficiaries; and
(iii) Are in current pay status for the month for which the payment
is made.
(b) Outcome Payment Period means a period of 60 months, not
necessarily consecutive, for which Social Security disability benefits
and Federal SSI cash benefits are not payable to the individual because
of the performance of substantial gainful activity (SGA) or by reason
of earnings from work. This period begins with the first month, ending
after the date on which the ticket was first assigned, for which such
benefits are not payable due to SGA or earnings. This period ends with
the 60th month, consecutive or otherwise, ending after such date, for
which such benefits are not payable due to SGA or earnings.
(c) Outcome Payment System is a system providing a schedule of
payments to an employment network (EN) for each month, during an
individual's outcome payment period, for which Social Security
disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits are not payable to
the individual because of work or earnings.
(d) Outcome Payment means the payment for an outcome payment month.
(e) Outcome Payment Month means a month, during the individual's
outcome payment period, for which Social Security disability benefits
and Federal SSI cash benefits are not payable to the individual because
of work or earnings. The maximum number of outcome payment months for
each ticket is 60.
(f) Outcome-Milestone Payment System is a system providing a
schedule of payments to an EN that includes, in addition to any outcome
payments which may be made during the individual's outcome payment
period, payment for completion by a beneficiary of up to four
milestones directed toward the goal of permanent employment. The
milestones for which payment may be made must occur prior to the
beginning of the individual's outcome payment period.
Sec. 411.505 How is an EN paid by SSA?
An EN can elect to be paid under either the outcome payment system
or the outcome-milestone payment system. The EN will elect a payment
system at the time the EN enters into an agreement with SSA. (For State
VR agencies, see Sec. 411.365.) The EN may periodically change its
elected payment system as described in Sec. 411.515.
Sec. 411.510 How is the State VR agency paid under the Ticket to Work
program?
(a) The State VR agency's payment choices are described in
Sec. 411.355.
(b) The State VR agency's decision to serve the beneficiary must be
communicated to the program manager (PM). (See Sec. 411.115(k) for a
definition of the PM.) At the same time, the State VR agency must
notify the PM of its selected payment system for that beneficiary.
(c) For each beneficiary who is already a client of the State VR
agency prior to receiving a ticket, the State VR agency will notify the
PM of the payment system election for each such beneficiary at the time
the beneficiary decides to assign the ticket to the State VR agency.
Sec. 411.515 Can the EN change its elected payment system?
(a) Yes. Any change by an EN in its elected EN payment system will
apply to beneficiaries who assign their ticket to the EN after the EN's
change in election becomes effective. A change in the EN's election
will become effective with the first day of the month following the
month in which the EN notifies us of the change. For beneficiaries who
already assigned their ticket to the EN under the EN's earlier elected
payment system, the EN's earlier elected payment system will continue
to apply. These rules also apply to a change by a State VR agency in
its elected EN payment system for cases in which the State VR agency
serves a beneficiary as an EN.
(b) After an EN (or a State VR agency) first elects an EN payment
system, the EN (or State VR agency) can choose to make one change in
its elected payment system at any time prior to the close of which of
the following is later:
(1) The 12th month following the month in which the EN (or State VR
agency) first elects an EN payment system; or
(2) The 12th month following the month in which we implement the
Ticket to Work program in the State in which the EN (or State VR
agency) operates.
(c) After an EN (or a State VR agency) first elects a payment
system, as part of signing the EN agreement with us (for State VR
agencies, see Sec. 411.365), the EN (or State VR agency) will have the
opportunity to change from its existing elected payment system during
times announced by us. We will offer the opportunity for each EN (and
State VR agency) to make a change in its elected payment system at
least every 18 months.
Sec. 411.520 How are beneficiaries whose tickets are assigned to an EN
affected by a change in that EN's elected payment system?
A change in an EN's (or State VR agency's) elected payment system
has no effect upon the beneficiaries who have assigned their ticket to
the EN (or State VR agency).
[[Page 67438]]
Sec. 411.525 How are the EN payments calculated under each of the two
EN payment systems?
(a) For payments for outcome payment months, both EN payment
systems use the payment calculation base as defined in
Sec. 411.500(a)(1) or (a)(2), as appropriate.
(1)(i) Under the outcome payment system, we can pay up to 60
monthly payments to the EN. For each month for which Social Security
disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits are not payable to
the individual because of work or earnings, the EN is eligible for a
monthly outcome payment. Payment for an outcome payment month under the
outcome payment system is equal to 40 percent of the payment
calculation base for the calendar year in which such month occurs,
rounded to the nearest whole dollar. (See Sec. 411.550.)
(ii) If a disabled beneficiary's entitlement to Social Security
disability benefits ends (see Secs. 404.316(b), 404.337(b) and
404.352(b) of this chapter) or eligibility for SSI benefits based on
disability or blindness terminates (see Sec. 416.1335 of this chapter)
because of the performance of SGA or by reason of earnings from work
activity, we will consider any month after the month with which such
entitlement ends or eligibility terminates to be a month for which
Social Security disability benefits and Federal SSI cash benefits are
not payable to the individual because of work or earnings if--
(A) The individual has gross earnings from employment (or net
earnings from self-employment as defined in Sec. 416.1110(b) of this
chapter) in that month that are more than the SGA threshold amount in
Sec. 404.1574(b)(2) of this chapter (or in Sec. 404.1584(d) of this
chapter for an individual who is statutorily blind); and
(B) The individual is not entitled to any monthly benefits under
title II or eligible for any benefits under title XVI for that month.
(2) Under the outcome-milestone payment system, we can pay the EN
for up to four milestones achieved by a beneficiary who has assigned
his or her ticket to the EN. The milestones for which payment may be
made must occur prior to the beginning of the beneficiary's outcome
period and meet the requirements of Sec. 411.535. In addition to the
milestone payments, monthly outcome payments can be paid to the EN
during the outcome payment period.
(b) The outcome-milestone payment system is designed so that the
total payments to the EN for a beneficiary are less than the total
amount to which payments would be limited if the EN were paid under the
outcome payment system. Under the outcome-milestone payment system, the
EN's total potential payment is about 85 percent of the total that
would have been potentially payable under the outcome payment system
for the same beneficiary.
(c) We will pay an EN to whom the individual has assigned a ticket
only for milestones or outcomes achieved in months prior to the month
in which the ticket terminates (see Sec. 411.155). We will not pay a
milestone or outcome payment to an EN based on an individual's work
activity or earnings in or after the month in which the ticket
terminates.
Sec. 411.530 How will the outcome payments be reduced when paid under
the outcome-milestone payment system?
Under the outcome-milestone payment system, each outcome payment
made to an EN with respect to an individual will be reduced by an
amount equal to \1/60\th of the milestone payments made to the EN with
respect to the same individual.
Sec. 411.535 What are the milestones for which an EN can be paid?
(a) Under the outcome-milestone payment system, there are four
milestones for which the EN can be paid. The milestones occur after the
date on which the ticket was first assigned and after the beneficiary
starts to work. The milestones are based on the earnings levels that we
use when we consider if work activity is SGA. We will use the SGA
threshold amount in Sec. 404.1574(b)(2) of this chapter for
beneficiaries who are not statutorily blind, and we will use the SGA
threshold amount in Sec. 404.1584(d) of this chapter for beneficiaries
who are statutorily blind. We will use these SGA threshold amounts in
order to measure if the beneficiary's earnings level meets the
milestone objective.
(1) The first milestone is met when the beneficiary has worked for
one calendar month and has gross earnings from employment (or net
earnings from self-employment as defined in Sec. 416.1110(b) of this
chapter) for that month that are more than the SGA threshold amount.
(2) The second milestone is met when the beneficiary has worked for
three calendar months within a 12-month period and has gross earnings
from employment (or net earnings from self-employment as defined in
Sec. 416.1110(b) of this chapter) for each of the three months that are
more than the SGA threshold amount. The month used to meet the first
milestone can be included in the three months used to meet the second
milestone.
(3) The third milestone is met when the beneficiary has worked for
seven calendar months within a 12-month period and has gross earnings
from employment (or net earnings from self-employment as defined in
Sec. 416.1110(b) of this chapter) for each of the seven months that are
more than the SGA threshold amount. Any of the months used to meet the
first two milestones can be included in the seven months used to meet
the third milestone.
(4) The fourth milestone is met when the beneficiary has worked for
12 calendar months within a 15-month period and has gross earnings from
employment (or net earnings from self-employment as defined in
Sec. 416.1110(b) of this chapter) for each of the 12 months that are
more than the SGA threshold amount. Any of the months used to meet the
first three milestones can be included in the 12 months used to meet
the fourth milestone.
(b) An EN can be paid for a milestone only if the milestone is
attained after a beneficiary has assigned his or her ticket to the EN.
See Sec. 411.575 for other milestone payment criteria.
Sec. 411.540 What are the payment amounts for each of the milestones?
(a) The payment for the first milestone is equal to 34 percent of
the payment calculation base for the calendar year in which the month
of attainment of the milestone occurs, rounded to the nearest whole
dollar.
(b) The payment for the second milestone is equal to 68 percent of
the payment calculation base for the calendar year in which the month
of attainment of the milestone occurs, rounded to the nearest whole
dollar.
(c) The payment for the third milestone is equal to 136 percent of
the payment calculation base for the calendar year in which the month
of attainment of the milestone occurs, rounded to the nearest whole
dollar.
(d) The payment for the fourth milestone is equal to 170 percent of
the payment calculation base for the calendar year in which the month
of attainment of the milestone occurs, rounded to the nearest whole
dollar.
(e) The month of attainment of the first milestone is the first
month in which the individual has the required earnings as described in
Sec. 411.535.
(f) The month of attainment of the second milestone is the 3rd
month, within a 12-month period, in which the individual has the
required earnings as described in Sec. 411.535.
(g) The month of attainment of the third milestone is the 7th
month, within
[[Page 67439]]
a 12-month period, in which the individual has the required earnings as
described in Sec. 411.535.
(h) The month of attainment of the fourth milestone is the 12th
month, within a 15-month period, in which the individual has the
required earnings as described in Sec. 411.535.
Sec. 411.545 What are the payment amounts for outcome payment months
under the outcome-milestone payment system?
The amount of each monthly outcome payment under the outcome-
milestone payment system is equal to 34 percent of the payment
calculation base for the calendar year in which the month occurs,
rounded to the nearest whole dollar, and reduced, if necessary, as
described in Sec. 411.530.
Sec. 411.550 What are the payment amounts for outcome payment months
under the outcome payment system?
Under the outcome payment system, the payment for an outcome
payment month is equal to 40 percent of the payment calculation base
for the calendar year in which the month occurs, rounded to the nearest
whole dollar.
Sec. 411.555 Can the EN keep the milestone and outcome payments even
if the beneficiary does not achieve all 60 outcome months?
(a) Yes. The EN can keep each milestone and outcome payment for
which the EN is eligible, even though the beneficiary does not achieve
all 60 outcome months.
(b) Payments which we make or deny to an EN or State VR agency
serving a beneficiary as an EN may be subject to adjustment (including
recovery, as appropriate) if we determine that more or less than the
correct amount was paid. This may happen, for example, because we
determine that the payment determination was in error or because of--
(1) An allocation of a payment under Sec. 411.560; or
(2) A determination or decision we make about an individual's right
to benefits which causes the payment or denial of a payment to be
incorrect (see Sec. 411.590(d)).
(c) If we determine that an overpayment or underpayment has
occurred, we will notify the EN or State VR agency serving a
beneficiary as an EN of the adjustment. Any dispute which the EN or
State VR agency has regarding the adjustment may be resolved under the
rules in Sec. 411.590(a) and (b).
Sec. 411.560 Is it possible to pay a milestone or outcome payment to
more than one EN?
Yes. It is possible for more than one EN to receive payment based
on the same milestone or outcome. If the beneficiary has assigned the
ticket to more than one EN at different times, and more than one EN
requests payment for the same milestone or outcome payment under its
elected payment system, the PM will make a determination of the
allocation of payment to each EN. The PM will make this determination
based upon the contribution of the services provided by each EN toward
the achievement of the outcomes or milestones. Outcome and milestone
payments will not be increased because the payments are shared between
two or more ENs.
Sec. 411.565 What happens if two or more ENs qualify for payment on
the same ticket but have elected different EN payment systems?
We will pay each EN according to its elected EN payment system in
effect at the time the beneficiary assigned the ticket to the EN.
Sec. 411.570 Can an EN request payment from the beneficiary who
assigned a ticket to the EN?
No. Section 1148(b)(4) of the Act prohibits an EN from requesting
or receiving compensation from the beneficiary for the services of the
EN.
Sec. 411.575 How does the EN request payment for milestones or outcome
payment months achieved by a beneficiary who assigned a ticket to the
EN?
The EN will send its request for payment, evidence of the
beneficiary's work or earnings and other information to the PM.
(a) Milestone payments. (1) We will pay the EN for milestones only
if--
(i) The outcome-milestone payment system was the EN's elected
payment system in effect at the time the beneficiary assigned a ticket
to the EN;
(ii) The milestones occur prior to the outcome payment period (see
Sec. 411.500(b));
(iii) The requirements in Sec. 411.535 are met; and
(iv) The ticket has not terminated for any of the reasons listed in
Sec. 411.155.
(2) The EN must request payment for each milestone achieved by a
beneficiary who has assigned a ticket to the EN. The request must
include evidence that the milestone was achieved, and other information
as we may require, to evaluate the EN's request. We do not have to stop
monthly benefit payments to the beneficiary before we can pay the EN
for milestones achieved by the beneficiary.
(b) Outcome payments. (1) We will pay an EN an outcome payment for
a month if--
(i)(A) Social Security disability benefits and Federal SSI cash
benefits are not payable to the individual for that month due to work
or earnings; or
(B) The requirements of Sec. 411.525(a)(1)(ii) are met in a case
where the beneficiary's entitlement to Social Security disability
benefits has ended or eligibility for SSI benefits based on disability
or blindness has terminated because of work activity or earnings; and
(ii) We have not already paid for 60 outcome payment months on the
same ticket; and
(iii) The ticket has not terminated for any of the other reasons
listed in Sec. 411.155.
(2) The EN must request payment for outcome payment months on at
least a quarterly basis. Along with the request, the EN must submit
evidence of the beneficiary's work or earnings (e.g. a statement of
monthly earnings from the employer or the employer's designated payroll
preparer, an unaltered copy of the beneficiary