**The Ticket To Work Program:**

**Marketing Strategies and Techniques**

**To Enhance Implementation**[^1]

**Prepared by:**

**Paul Wehman, Ph.D and W. Grant Revell, M.S., M.Ed.**

**Submitted to the Urban Institute:**

**March 31, 2003**

**Rehabilitation Research and Training Center**

**Virginia Commonwealth University**

**P.O. Box 842011**

**Richmond, VA 23284-2011**

**(804) 828-1851**

**FINAL REVISIONS**

**Table of Contents**

**The Ticket to Work Program:**

**Marketing Strategies and Techniques**

**To Enhance Implementation**

Executive Summary

I.  The Ticket to Work Program

II. Current Marketing Efforts with the Ticket to Work and Related
    Federal Initiatives

III. Marketing Principles and Strategies: An Overview

### Marketing the Ticket to SSA Beneficiaries

IV. Marketing the Ticket to ENs

V.  Recommendations

**Executive Summary**

The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review and
critique of the marketing strategies best suited to expanding
participation in the Ticket to Work Program by Ticket holders and
increasing the number and diversity of Employment Networks. Direct mail,
web based outreach, targeted marketing to selected opinion makers (such
as disability physicians, private rehabilitation counselors, or family
members), specialized media outlets, and a number of other marketing
strategies will be critiqued and analyzed as a way to reach
beneficiaries and ENs. The emphasis will be on cost efficient strategies
to maximize the greatest utilization of the Ticket.

The two main marketing issues related to ENs are 1) there are not enough
quality ENs and 2) the ENs in place are not taking Tickets and making a
sufficient number of placements. Marketing considerations for ENs must
expand the base of existing ENs to include the business community. EN
partnerships are needed among the rehabilitation and business community,
and marketing strategies that reach business and that encourage
partnerships are needed. The main marketing issue for reaching
beneficiaries of Social Security Disability benefits who are current or
potential Ticket holders is recognizing that at its very core, marketing
the Ticket to Work involves marketing employment first. Marketing
considerations for beneficiaries must recognize and address the
employment-related fears, interests and support needs of Ticket
recipients.

Marketing strategies recommended for expanding participation by
beneficiaries and ENs in the Ticket to Work program that are discussed
in detail in this paper include:

1.  Create a major Marketing initiative within the Ticket to Work
    program that would implement model demonstration programs, targeted
    marketing, business recruitment coordination, and evaluation of
    outcome. Enlist the assistance of marketing specialists to help
    package and coordinate the Marketing initiative.

2.  Utilize existing resources that are working closely with the
    business community. For example, there are current initiatives in
    place with the National Chamber of Commerce and with Business
    Leadership Networks that could incorporate efforts to expand
    enrollment of businesses as ENs.

3.  In segmenting the market of Ticket holders, work closely with
    minority communities, especially African Americans and Hispanic
    American communities, to market the Ticket to Work program as a way
    to enter the nation\'s labor force by using the appropriate Chamber
    of Commerce entities and also selected based organizations.

4.  Promote use of the Small Business Administration and business trade
    associations such as the Society for Human Resource Management, and
    National Federation of Independent Business as a way to promote the
    Ticket.

5.  Establish Model Demonstration projects that show the power of
    private sector entities serving as ENs in the Ticket to Work
    program.

6.  Establish Model Demonstration projects would show the power of
    blending ENs from the private sector and public sector.

7.  Invest heavily in a Ticket to Work Internet site that is linked to
    at least 20 major business and trade associations, both nationally
    and in each state where the Ticket program has been established.

8.  Meet with at least 100 Fortune 1000 or larger corporations who would
    be willing to consider being an EN in high-density Ticket areas of
    the United States.

9.  Target specific Ticket holders for targeted marketing to include
    email, direct mail, and use of radio and television in neighborhood
    communities where these beneficiaries live.

10. Establish partnerships at the community level that combine
    information on Benefits Planning, EN options, work-related supports,
    and the Ticket to Work in outreach efforts to beneficiaries.

11. Fund demonstration efforts that test different partnership
    arrangements to determine how best to conduct outreach on the Ticket
    to Work to people who, for example, are experiencing different
    primary disabilities, are youth/young adults transitioning from
    secondary and post secondary education and training settings, and/or
    are from different ethnic backgrounds.

12. Establish a national Technical Assistance program that would collect
    and disseminate information on promising practices in establishing
    EN partnership arrangements and marketing the Ticket to Work to
    beneficiaries and that would also provide direct technical
    assistance in the areas of marketing to ENs and marketing to
    beneficiaries.

13. Require that any EN who is marketing its services on an interstate
    basis offer a Toll-free telephone line for use by Ticket holders.

14. Cultivate the Project with Industry programs and One Stop Centers as
    key community hubs for outreach to Ticket holders and linkages to
    ENs (including employers), particularly those One Stops that have
    the newly established Program Navigator positions. Projects with
    Industry is a large established program in Vocational Rehabilitation
    where there are already large employer networks established.
    Maximize the use of the Office of Disability Employment Policy and
    the Employment and Training Administration within the Department of
    Labor to promote marketing of the Ticket through the One Stops.

15. Provide research and evaluation for marketing efforts and optimal
    market segmentation for appropriate Ticket holders to be targeted
    for marketing activities.

Eddie Guerrero studied communications and Spanish at George Mason
University, where he earned a bachelor\'s degree in 1999. The
27-year-old Great Falls resident wants to work in customer service and
build his resume to attain a government job. [^2]

Guerrero, like thousands of other Northern Virginians, can\'t find work
in the tough economic climate. But an economic upswing won\'t solve his
employment struggle.

For 20 years, Guerrero has battled muscular dystrophy, an incurable
neuromuscular disorder that can cause loss of muscle use. He uses a
wheelchair and is unable to extend his arm to shake hands. He needs
extra equipment to use the computer and phone, and employers often
aren\'t interested in meeting these needs.

\"Part of it is the perception of many companies that people with
disabilities might be too much of a burden,\" Guerrero said Wednesday at
the Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington. \"It\'s a challenge to find
an employer that is willing to make accommodations.\"

Berry Cuffee of Herndon and Joann McSorley of Springfield joined
Guerrero Wednesday as the first three Virginians to receive Tickets to
Work, a Social Security Administration program to help disabled people
land jobs.

\"The important thing here is choice,\" said Social Security
Commissioner Jo Anne Barnhart. \`\`We are giving people a choice where
to find help if they want to work.\"

The work tickets, which will be mailed to about 196,000 Virginians over
the next several months, can be used by Social Security Disability
Income and Supplemental Security Income beneficiaries to obtain
employment services. The voluntary program was created through a 1999
federal law and provides job support services through public or private
employment networks.

Networks and ticket holders devise a plan to help the beneficiary find
work. Eight networks offer vocational rehabilitation, job training and
other support services to Virginia candidates.

\"Most importantly, increases in work opportunities to people with
disabilities increases their independence,\" Barnhart said. \`\`In our
country, \[jobs\] define who we are and what we do with our lives.\"

Nearly 70 percent of working-age disabled Americans are unemployed, and
the threat of losing Social Security disability coverage, Medicare or
Medicaid is a deterrent to finding work.

The ticket program aims to remove this barrier by ensuring immediate
reinstatement of benefits if a person\'s medical condition forces them
to stop working. This request must be made within five years after
benefits, including Medicare and Medicaid, end.

Virginia, 19 other states and Washington, D.C., are part of the
program\'s second phase that covers about 2.6 million people. The first
tickets were distributed to 13 states in February 2002. Tickets will be
dispersed in Maryland and 16 other states in 2003.

Employment providers receive incremental payments from the Social
Security Administration for successful job placement. Due to the
program\'s infancy, only \$10,000 to \$15,000 has been distributed
nationwide to Employment Networks through the Ticket program.

Annual funding will vary on the extent of placement, but the
administration will not limit rewards to productive organizations, said
Ken McGill, the Social Security Administration\'s assistant commissioner
for employment support programs.

The program improves the hiring potential for Virginia\'s disabled
community, but it will take one or two years to evaluate its success,
said Joseph Bowman, commissioner for the Virginia Department for the
Blind and Vision Impaired.

For Virginia\'s first ticket holders, it opens new doors to the job
market. \"It\'s not a matter of receiving a pay check,\'\' Guerrero
said. \`\`It\'s a matter of personal achievement - to create a sense of
self.\"

This case study is a true-life description of what is happening in over
two-thirds of the states in the country as the Ticket to Work program is
implemented. A major aspect of this program is the use of a Ticket,
which gives individuals with disabilities the power to select the
program they want to help them go to work. The overall purpose of the
program is also to expand the universe of service providers available to
serve individuals receiving SSI and/or SSDI benefits in obtaining
services necessary to find, enter, and retain employment. The key to
it\'s success, however, is marketing the Ticket so persons with
disabilities will want to use it and, secondly, to identify
organizations who are interested in becoming Employment Networks to work
with the Ticket holders.

I.  **The Ticket to Work Program**

The Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program is the centerpiece of
the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999 (TWWIIA),
and a key component of President Bush\'s New Freedom Initiative. The
goal of the Ticket Program is to give disability beneficiaries the
opportunity to achieve steady, long-term employment by providing them
greater choices and opportunities to go to work if they choose to do so.
The legislation also removes barriers that previously influenced
people\'s choices between healthcare coverage and work. The Ticket to
Work program; the Medicaid Buy-In; Benefits Planning, Assistance and
Outreach (BPAO); and Protection and Advocacy for Beneficiaries of Social
Security (PABSS) are key initiatives contained in TWWIIA for increasing
employment outcomes for beneficiaries.

In 2001, SSA began contracting with national, state, and local service
providers to become Employment Networks (ENs). Employment Networks are
service providers that work with beneficiaries to provide support and
employment-related assistance. The outreach for qualified providers and
the contracting process is ongoing and open-ended throughout the life of
the Program. The Social Security Administration (SSA) issues Tickets to
eligible adult (ages 18-64 years) beneficiaries. Tickets can be used to
obtain rehabilitation and employment services from any EN a beneficiary
chooses (as long as the EN agrees to accept that individual's Ticket).
Beneficiaries receiving Tickets are not required to participate in the
Program or go to work. They may choose to use the Ticket and contact any
EN of their choice to discuss services. After the EN of choice and the
beneficiary design and agree upon an employment plan, the Ticket is then
assigned to the EN. To allow thorough evaluation and to ensure full
implementation of the Ticket program on a timely basis, the program is
being implemented in three phases. States and territories are divided
among the 3 phases. Within each phase, tickets are being released in
one-tenth increments based upon the last digit of the SSN.

Once an EN chooses to work with a beneficiary, they are responsible for
providing the agreed-upon services as long as the Ticket remains
assigned to them. Once the beneficiary reaches the Ticket Program key
outcome -- employment at the Substantial Gainful Employment level for
defined time periods - ENs become eligible to receive payments from the
Social Security Administration. In addition to the Ticket Program, SSA
established other service supports in the form of locally based
organizations that provide benefit planning, assistance and outreach to
beneficiaries, as well as legal services through protection and advocacy
systems in each state.

Any agency or state/political subdivision or private entity that can
provide or arrange for the delivery of services is eligible to apply to
be an EN. As seen in Table 1, ENs can be a single entity, a consortium,
or an association of organizations collaborating to combine resources to
serve Ticket-holders.

**Table 1**

**Examples of Potential ENs**

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| -   Disability-Rehabilitation     | -   Employment Agencies           |
|     Providers                     |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| -   State VR Agencies             | -   Independent Living Centers    |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| -   WIA One Stop Centers, Boards  | -   Former Alternate Participants |
|                                   |     (APs)                         |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| -   Transportation Providers      | -   Educational Institutions      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| -   Community and Faith-Based     |                                   |
|     Non-Profit Organizations      |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| -   State/Local Government Human  |                                   |
|     Service Agencies              |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| -   Employers and Chambers of     |                                   |
|     Commerce/Business Councils    |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

The Ticket to Work program is heavily dependent on the number and
quality of Employment Networks (ENs) willing to participate as
providers, as well as their respective capacity to be successful. If
there are insufficient ENs, then Ticket holders will not have real
choice in selecting an EN. If Ticket holders then receive
inept/inadequate job procurement and job supports, they will then
dropout of the Ticket program in large numbers. The Ticket program is
extremely dependent on beneficiaries who upon receiving the Ticket,
actually act upon it by searching for appropriate ENs. Beneficiaries
then need to surrender their Tickets to an ENs who they have confidence
can help them be successful with their return to work effort. **In
short, there are two marketing efforts that are critical: First,
marketing to beneficiaries to act upon their Ticket, and second,
marketing to ENs to participate and be effective.** For further and more
indepth information on the roles associated with how the Ticket program
can be implemented, the reader is referred to an excellent overview by
Growick (2001).

Therefore, it is the purpose of this paper to provide a comprehensive
review and critique of which marketing strategies are best suited to
meet the above described needs in the Ticket to Work implementation
process. Direct mail, web based outreach, targeted marketing to selected
opinion makers (such as disability physicians, private rehabilitation
counselors, or family members), and specialized media outlets will be
critiqued and analyzed as a way to reach beneficiaries and also ENs. The
emphasis will be on a cost efficient strategy to maximize the greatest
utilization of the Ticket. There are two main issues related to ENs: 1)
there are not enough quality ENs and 2) the ENs in place are not taking
Tickets and making a sufficient number of placements.

It is also important to emphasize that marketing the Ticket to
beneficiaries, at its very core, involves marketing employment to them.
Marketing considerations for beneficiaries must recognize and address
the employment-related fears, interests and support needs of Ticket
recipients.

The marketing of the Ticket to Work program needs to be approached in a
similar way to any new innovation. This means that it is critical to
study those who are already using the product and identify those who are
most likely to benefit from it. We therefore consulted with marketing
experts and direct mail companies as to optimal strategies for
communicating the Ticket as a viable product. This information was then
synthesized and integrated into a paper that describes what is being
done and what needs to do done to enhance marketing plans.

II. **Current Marketing Efforts with the Ticket to Work and Related
    Federal Initiatives**

The Social Security Administration has contracted with Maximus to be the
Program Manager for the Ticket to Work Program. Along with the marketing
efforts of Maximus, SSA has also initiated its own outreach and
marketing efforts to beneficiaries for the Ticket to Work. These efforts
include SSA developing notices focusing on the Continuing Disability
Review (CDR) protections for Maximus to use with the Ticket and sending
beneficiaries a letter and a booklet with the Ticket explaining the TTW
program (Social Security Administration, February 2003).

Marketing the Ticket to potential Employment Networks and to Ticket
recipients is a primary responsibility of the Program Manager, Maximus.
At the November 12, 2002 meeting of the Ticket to Work and Work
Incentives Advisory Panel, Mary Satterfield, the Project Director at
Maximus for the Ticket to Work and Self Sufficiency Program, made a
presentation on the efforts of Maximus to date in marketing the Ticket
to potential Employment Networks. The following points are drawn from
her comments to the panel.

-   There was a short start-up timeline for the Ticket program, which
    influenced there not being a major national public awareness program
    preceding the implementation of the Ticket initiative. The marketing
    efforts of Maximus therefore focused initially on bringing awareness
    about the Ticket to the community. Maximus found that when the
    national awareness campaign began, very few organizations had
    information about the Ticket.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   From the perspective of Maximus, its efforts to market the Ticket
    began only after the release by SSA of the Request for Proposals
    asking providers to submit applications to become ENs.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   When a Ticket rollout phase begins in a state, Maximus attempts to
    stratify the audience in each rollout state and customize its
    marketing message. Maximus attempts to identify and engage key
    decision-makers.

-   The customized marketing messages used by Maximus include promoting
    the opportunities found in the Ticket program, its flexibility and
    adaptability, its voluntary basis for Ticket holders, its
    non-prescriptive nature, and the potential for partnerships.

-   The specific outreach methods used by Maximus include sponsoring its
    own events, exhibiting/presenting at targeted market conferences;
    arranging face to face meetings; conference calls; direct mail
    campaigns; email campaigns and strategies; listserves; and articles,
    stories and ads in trade publications and newsletters.

-   Maxmus analyzes the role in each state related to the Ticket of key
    agencies such as Departments of Labor, Education, Mental
    Health/Mental Retardation, and Vocational Rehabiliation, as well as
    key consumer groups.

-   Maximus also analyzes beneficiary demographics and labor markets,
    including unemployment rates and urban/rural nature of jobs, as a
    part of building beneficiary interest and employment networks.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Maximus works to leverage success in a state, such as working with
    state level (e.g. Governors Task Force on Employment of Individuals
    with Disabilities) and more regional/local level "champions" (e.g.
    grass roots advocacy organizations) to build collaborative
    partnerships to support the Ticket effort.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Maximus has noted four primary potential sources of ENs: The public
    and quasi-government sector (including One Stop Centers), the
    private non-profit sector, the business sector, and the education
    and learning institution sector. Generally to date, the business and
    the education/learning institution sectors have shown little
    interest in becoming ENs.

-   As of November 2002, Maximus has made approximately 150,000 to
    200,00 marketing contacts with potential ENs and had received 629
    applications to become Employment Networks.[^3]

> (Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel, 2002)

The comments of Ms. Satterfield to the Ticket to Work Advisory Panel
reflect the complexity of the marketing efforts to date by Maximus and
the challenges it faces in building awareness and interest in the Ticket
among both potential Employment Networks and SSI and SSDI beneficiaries
who are Ticket holders. The comments and current EN enrollment data also
reflect the very limited initial return Maximus has received in terms of
EN interest in response to its marketing efforts. In building the base
for discussions that follow in this paper on potential marketing
strategies that could be used with the Ticket to Work, it is important
to review the marketing strategies used in other federal programs
targeted to populations of individuals with significant disabilities
and/or economic disadvantages.

The federal Welfare to Work Grants Program initiative contains a number
of marketing challenges and potential examples that have implications
for marketing of the Ticket to Work. Nightingale, Pindus, and Trutko
(2002) describe the efforts of Welfare to Work grantees in response to
the charge set by Congress to serve individuals who are or were
recipients of Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) and who would face
the most difficult barriers to employment. As found with the Ticket to
Work in the first-phase rollout states, targeting and enrolling the
intended recipients of the Welfare to Work services were very
challenging early implementation issues. States initially were not
meeting their planned enrollment levels. With the use of targeted
outreach and marketing strategies, states were able to increase
enrollment in the Welfare to Work program and to meet targeted
participation levels (Nightingale et al, 2002). The Welfare to Work
programs adopted multiple strategies to address the enrollment issue.
Some examples are as follows:

-   Focus first on specific sub-groups of the overall population, build
    success, and expand to the larger population.

-   Select service contractors who have special experience with the
    targeted population and who are currently serving this population;
    providers then established their own outreach to recruit individuals
    for the Welfare to Work program, therefore directly linking the
    provider to the intended beneficiary of the service.

-   Undertake direct outreach to the targeted population through making
    presentations on the Welfare to Work program at locations where that
    population seeks assistance. These locations include local Social
    Services Agencies and other service providers, and also at job fairs
    and career centers where those individuals interested in employment
    are coming for information on jobs.

-   Undertake more indirect outreach through distribution of
    flyers/brochures at Social Service agencies and One-Stop Career
    Centers (for example) and through public service announcements in
    the local media.

> (Nightingale et al, 2002)

A significant difference in the set-up of the Welfare to Work Initiative
and in the Ticket to Work is that SSA uses a national Program Manager,
Maximus, as a key source of information for potential Employment
Networks and for Ticket holders. The Welfare to Work program does not
have a national program manager; marketing strategies are developed and
implemented by state and local grantees. Another significant difference
is that the Welfare to Work program did have participation requirements
and potential sanctions for mandatory participants; the Ticket to Work
Program is strictly voluntary. However, there are important similarities
in the Welfare to Work and the Ticket to Work programs: Both have
employment as a primary intended outcome, and both target populations
who have historically had low return to work rates and who face multiple
employment challenges. Therefore, the targeting and marketing strategies
that have been successful in the Welfare to Work program are a potential
resource for the Ticket to Work.

A second example of the marketing steps taken with a federal program
involves the State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Congress
initiated the CHIP program through Title XXI of the Social Security Act
as a part of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. The CHIP block grants
provided funds for use by states to expand the health insurance coverage
available for uninsured children from families who were financially
unable to purchase private insurance and did not quality for Medicaid
(Wegener, 1999). States and localities used numerous marketing
strategies to make information about the CHIP resource available to
potentially eligible families and to encourage their enrollment. Wegener
(1999) and Mickey (1999) identify the following example components of
outreach strategies utilized for CHIP:

-   Multimedia ad campaigns and direct mailings to potential CHIP
    beneficiaries.

-   Toll-free hot lines and help-lines as well as web sites to provide
    information about the program and how to enroll.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Out-stationing outreach workers in places in the community
    frequented by targeted families, such as Social Service settings.

-   Using state and local level advocates for the targeted families to
    preview CHIP marketing information and to give direction to the
    sponsoring agencies on how best to implement CHIP.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Targeting information to small businesses who frequently did not pay
    health insurance as a benefit and who therefore had uninsured
    employees who were potential candidates for health insurance
    coverage through CHIP.

-   Making information on CHIP available through the school systems and
    establishing additional partnerships with other education and
    service agencies that serve the families of potential CHIP
    beneficiaries.

There is limited empirical evidence available on which outreach
strategies are most effective in increasing enrollment in the CHIP
program (Wegener, 1999). As seen with the Welfare to Work program
discussed earlier, the CHIP initiative involved grants from the federal
to the state and community level without the national Program Manager
used with the Ticket to Work program. Therefore, the Welfare to Work and
CHIP programs do differ from the Ticket to Work's use of a Program
Manager with national marketing responsibility. It is also difficult to
document empirically which specific outreach and marketing effort to
potential participants have been most effective in increasing enrollment
in the Welfare to Work and/or CHIP programs. However, a number of the
example marketing strategies used in the Welfare to Work and CHIP
initiatives are worthwhile examples for consideration and possible use
with the Ticket program. Both programs attempted to reach and engage the
targeted population by:

-   tailoring their marketing campaigns to state and community level
    considerations,

-   establishing partnerships with local agencies and programs,

-   targeting sub-groups within the overall eligible population who were
    most likely to respond to the outreach effort,

-   using outreach workers located in key settings, and

-   selecting service contractors who were currently working with
    potential beneficiaries of the CHIP and Welfare to Work initiatives.

The direct implications for the Ticket to Work program of these example
marketing strategies drawn from the CHIP and Welfare to Work program
will be developed in Section IV of this paper, Marketing the Ticket to
Beneficiaries. It is important to note also that the CHIP program's
targeted marketing initiative with small businesses who need help in
getting health insurance for their employees has particularly strong
implications for the Ticket to Work program. In this example, both the
business and its employees would benefit from the health insurance
coverage offered by CHIP. Therefore, business becomes a strong advocate
of the federal initiative. As will be developed further in the Marketing
the Ticket to Work to Employment Networks (Section V) of this paper,
business is currently a largely an untapped resource for use with the
Ticket.

**III.** **Marketing Principles and Strategies: An Overview**[^4]

To fully understand the best ways to market to beneficiaries and also
market to ENs, it is essential to have an understanding of what
marketing is and how marketing principles and strategies are
implemented. Essentially, marketing in the context of this paper is
about SSA or its designate reaching as many beneficiaries as possible
with Tickets and persuading them to go to ENs for the purpose of
becoming employed with earnings above the SGA level. Marketing is also
about the ENs persuading Ticket holders to come to them for job services
and stay with them.

A key marketing concept is demand, which is a human want, such as a
Ticket holder who desires to work and is backed by buying power of the
Ticket. The buying power aspect of marketing is what makes the Ticket a
unique approach to employment services. Historically, individuals with
disabilities have not had buying power control of the services they
wanted. People demand products with benefits that are satisfying to them
based on their wants and available resources. An individual will satisfy
his/her needs with products and services. A product such as job support
or a special accommodation may satisfy a vocational need or want, such
as the client\'s job adjustment or the employer\'s satisfaction with a
cost efficient worker.

For example, SSA beneficiaries have a need to work to improve their
economic outcomes. SSA beneficiaries\' needs must be inherent in
effective marketing. Finding ways to fulfill and to communicate the
Ticket to Work program will be critical to its success. We now turn to
the underpinnings of marketing management philosophies and how they are
interrelated.

**Marketing Management Philosophies**

In order to fully understand the marketing mission facing SSA with
regard to the Ticket and also how marketing techniques may be applied,
it is important to realize there are two exchange paradigms in place: 1)
The exchange between SSA (or its designate) and Ticket holders; and 2)
the exchange between SSA and the ENs. Marketing philosophies and
techniques need to be managed to gain the best return on investments.

Marketing management involves carrying out tasks to achieve desired
exchanges with a particular targeted market. For the Ticket to Work
Program to be effective, there must be an ongoing exchange between the
beneficiary (Ticket holder) and the EN. In order to understand how ENs
will need to attract beneficiaries to surrender their Ticket, it will be
helpful to understand five key marketing management philosophies \--
production, product, selling, marketing, and societal marketing. These
five concepts are the guide organizations use to conduct marketing
activities. For example, the production concept holds the belief that a
consumer will prefer the product that is highly available and
affordable. Hence, ENs will more likely get the business of Ticket
holders if they are physically accessible, close in proximity to where
beneficiaries live, show that they are \"disability friendly\", and
aggressive in pursuing the beneficiaries\' Ticket. This thinking leads
into the product concept, which suggests that a consumer (i.e., Ticket
holder) will prefer the product (i.e., EN), that offers the most
quality, performance, and features. The selling concept holds the belief
that the consumer will only buy the organization's product if the
organization embarks on a large-scale selling and promotional effort.

For example, those ENs who invest significantly in selling expertise
will be able to reach Ticket holders better than those who do not. The
focus of the selling concept is on the products the company already has
rather than a brand new product. The marketing concept holds the belief
that in order to achieve organizational goals, the company should
determine the needs and wants of target markets and deliver the desired
satisfaction more effectively and efficiently than their competitors.
The customer is the major focus of the marketing concept.

The last concept is societal marketing, which holds the belief that a
company will determine the needs and wants of their consumers and
deliver the desired satisfaction more effectively and efficiently than
their competitors. Societal marketing is a more recent concept than any
of the other marketing management philosophies, as was noted in the
recent presentation made to the Ticket to Work Advisory Panel by an
expert from a major public relations firm, Fleishman & Hilliard. (P.
Johnson, November 13, 2002). The focus of this concept is on the
long-term, overall consumer welfare rather than short-term wants. A
company that shows responsibility for the community and environment is
an example of a company that follows the societal marketing concept.
This concept is critical to the Ticket program because to maximize their
services, ENs will need to work with other human service agencies,
families and Ticket holders.

In order to implement a marketing campaign that will create a greater
number of ENs in the marketplace and make them more effective, Johnson
(2002) identifies five important keys to running any such campaign.
These are: **1) Be selective\--**Talking to everyone can be like talking
to no one; **2) Have clear behavioral objectives from the outset**\--If
you don\'t know where you\'re going, you\'re likely to end up someplace
else; **3) Identify and address barriers**\--At the heart of changing
behaviors is understanding what barriers exist to prevent your target
audience, in this case ENs, from adopting the new behavior; **4) Hone
your message and stick to it**\--Audiences need to see issues in people
terms, not in expert terms. They need to have clear choices presented to
them and then time to work through the alternative choices and their
role in them. Potential ENs will be no different. **5) Integrated
marketing communication works**\-- Marketing tools have some kinds of
effects for some kinds of people some of the time. Not knowing what to
do, programs often use mass media to overcome lack of grass roots work.
This is often a mistake, and to date, it probably has been the major
mistake in the marketing outreach to ENs for the Ticket to Work.

Consider the following example of the staffing company, Exclusive
Staffing, partnering with the Richmond City School System to become an
EN. Exclusive Staffing, a minority owned staffing agency in Richmond,
Virginia, employs temporary to permanent workers in secretarial,
administrative, clerical, technical, and professional positions. It also
provides employees for several large corporations in the Richmond area.
Richmond City Schools could assist in training students through their
vocational education programs to provide valuable employees to companies
served by Exclusive Staffing. Students transitioning to the work world
would greatly benefit. Exclusive Staffing would also greatly benefit by
having a new qualified pool of applicants. The two organizations could
share payments received from SSA. The relationship would be an excellent
EN model for social responsibility, as well as bettering the lives of
students with disabilities entering and gaining competitive employment.

# Use of the Internet to Enhance Marketing

Recent technological advances have changed the marketing landscape
dramatically and have created a new Internet age. In order to survive in
this new environment, companies must adapt their marketing strategies
and tactics. The Internet's revolutionary technology has shaped the new
millennium and can have a tremendous influence on individualizing
marketing efforts with beneficiaries and ENs. There are several
underlying forces that are repeatedly reflected when the Internet is
utilized. These include the use of intermediaries, customization, and
customerization. For example, [intermediaries]{.underline} include both
entities that may only be available via the Internet as well as those
that have retail stores and online stores. This allows those retail
stores to connect with customers and increase business by being
available through several channels. [Customization]{.underline} allows
businesses to customize their products and services, messages, and media
for the individual buyer. Another one of the key Internet marketing
terms is [customerization]{.underline}, which allows individuals to
design their own product based on all available options. Each of these
have serious implications in the education and information referral for
SSA beneficiaries who are Ticket holders. These three marketing concepts
are about how to most efficiently match up high probability SSA
beneficiaries who are Ticket holders with viable ENs.

In order to utilize the Internet as a way to market the Ticket program,
it is necessary to understand the concept of E-business, an electronic
means to conduct a company's business. E-commerce includes buying and
selling methods that are supported by electronic means, principally
through the Internet. E marketing is the selling side of e-commerce, and
e purchasing is the buying side of e-commerce. Just consider the
extraordinary power and efficiency of how the Internet might be utilized
for matching Ticket holders up with interested ENs.

For example, consider how Robert, a Ticket holder, with a long-term
history of psychiatric disabilities but tremendous interest in using his
computer daily, might regularly surf for ENs in his geographical area
that offer attractive jobs or market appealing types of employment fee
arrangements and speed of job identification. Alternatively, consider
how easy it would be for the Bank of America in establishing its new
call center to scan dozens of Ticket holders in the existing
geographical area and send out invitations for individuals to apply for
available positions. Bank of America would communicate with SSA or it\'s
designate, Maximus, to identify zip codes of Ticket holders and target
them for direct email or direct mail marketing.

E-commerce has many advantages that make buying private and convenient,
with greater selection and greater access to products. E-commerce is
also advantageous to sellers because it reduces selling costs, provides
greater access to global markets, increases speed and efficiency, and
helps build customer relationships. A company can conduct e marketing in
several ways. Creating a Web site, placing ads and promotions online,
setting up or participating in Web communities, and using online e-mail
or webcasting are all ways that a company can attract new customers to
their business and maintain existing customer relationships. Companies
must incorporate online marketing into their future marketing plans so
that they will have a fully integrated marketing mix. Targeted emailing,
while obnoxious and a nuisance to many, is one way to efficiently
communicate about the Ticket and how it might work to selected (but not
all) beneficiaries. This would be an excellent way for an EN to utilize
customerization on the Internet to recruit Ticket holders.

# The Marketing Process and Marketing Analysis 

The definitive marketing process consists of several steps. These steps
include a) analyzing marketing opportunities, b) selecting targeted
markets, and c) developing and managing the marketing mix. These steps
will be discussed and examined further.

Analyzing marketing opportunities means that a company will divide its
customers' needs, as well as product information, to determine how their
organization can meets these needs. **Market** **segmentation** involves
dividing a market into different groups with different characteristics
and behaviors that may require separate products. A market segment
focuses on a particular group of consumers that may respond to a similar
way to a particular set of marketing efforts. Marketing segmentation
will also be discussed in detail in the next section.

For example, an EN such as J. W. Marriott Corp might choose to focus on
one particular market segment early on, such as those Ticket holders
only with mental retardation or only with visual impairment, and add
segments as business begins to increase. Market positioning is arranging
the company's product in the minds of its target customers so that it
occupies a clear, distinctive, and desirable place relative to similar
products. This would allow Marriott to develop expertise unique only to
the job needs of this particular population. The final step of the
marketing process is the development of the marketing mix and is defined
as a set of controllable, tactical marketing tools (such as product,
price, placement, and promotion) that a company combines to produce the
desired response from their targeted market. These tools will influence
supply and demand responses from Ticket holders to different EN
marketing strategies.

# Market Segmentation

Market segmentation is the process of dividing a market into smaller
groups of buyers with distinct characteristics, needs, or behaviors that
may require different marketing mixes or separate products. This concept
has special meaning for the next section of this paper that analyzes
which SSA beneficiaries might be good targets for marketing of the
Ticket. **There are several levels of market segmentation: 1) No
segmentation, also known as mass marketing, 2) complete segmentation,
which is also known as micromarketing, or 3) somewhere in between these
two concepts, which is also known as niche marketing**. Mass marketing
involves mass production, distribution, and promoting of a product in
the exact same way to all consumers. In many ways what appears to now be
happening is mass marketing of the Ticket to no specific target groups.
Micromarketing tailors products and marketing programs to match the
tastes of specific individuals and locations. Segmented marketing
involves the isolation of broad segments and makes offers to those
segments that match the needs of one or more of the segments. Niche
marketing focuses on subgroups that have been narrowly defined within
the segments, such as groups that have a distinct set of traits that may
seek a special combination of benefits.

There are numerous individual ways to segment a market. Major
corporations face this dilemma daily as they decide how to invest
limited marketing dollars. Different variables can be chosen in order to
determine which will give the best segmentation opportunities. It is
specifically these variables, however, that are critical to uncover for
making one\'s marketing effort most efficient. Consumer marketing
focuses on geographic, demographic, psychographic, and behavioral
variables. Geographic segmentation divides the market into different
geographical units such as nations, regions, states, counties, cities or
even neighborhoods. Demographic segmentation divides the market into
demographic variables based on age, gender, family size, family life
cycle, income, occupation, education, religion, race, generation, and
nationality. Psychographic segmentation divides the market into
different groups based on social class, lifestyle, or personality
characteristics. Behavioral segmentation divides the market into groups
that are based on consumers' knowledge, attitudes, uses, or response to
a product. Each of these segments has immediate application to the
Ticket program, as will be seen below.

**[Advertising]{.underline}**. Advertising is any paid form and
promotion of ideas, goods, or services by an identified sponsor that is
nonpersonal. An advertiser such as an EN recruiting Ticket holders must
make decisions regarding its objectives, budget, the message, media, and
evaluating the results of their efforts. The objectives should be clear
and determine whether the advertiser will inform, persuade, or remind
buyers of their product. The budget should be based on what is
affordable to the EN, as well as what other ENs are spending. The media
decision is based on the particular reach, frequency, and impact goal.
The major media type must be determined, and the media vehicle must also
be determined a long with the media timing. Major media types include
newspapers, television, direct mailings, radio, magazine, and finally,
the Internet.

**[Sales Promotion.]{.underline}** The next step in the marketing
communication mix is sales promotion. Sales promotion involves a variety
of consumer and trade promotion incentive tools that include coupons,
premiums, contests, and buying allowances. Consumer promotion tools are
focused on the consumer; trade promotion tools are focused on retailers
and wholesalers. These tools are designed to stimulate additional
business for the company.

**[Public Relations]{.underline}**. Public relations is another aspect
of the marketing communication mix that is used to help build
relationships with the company's various publics. Press relations tools
can include news, speeches, special events, written materials,
audiovisual material, corporate identity materials, public service
activities and finally, the company website. Public relations
objectives, messages, implementation, and evaluation should be carefully
set and should blend effectively with the company's other communication
efforts.

**[Selling]{.underline}**. Personal selling is considered the
interpersonal focus of the integrated communication mix. Building and
managing a successful salesforce is very important to the success of
personal selling. The company's sales force should assist in the
development of profitable and long lasting relationships with its
customers that is based on customer value and satisfaction.

**[Direct Marketing]{.underline}**. Direct marketing is the final step
of the marketing communication mix. It focuses on connecting directly to
targeted individuals to obtain immediate results and long lasting
relationships. Direct marketers use detailed databases so that they may
tailor their offers and communications to the certain market segments as
well as the individual buyer. Direct marketing has become the fastest
growing form of marketing due to its low-cost and efficient way of
reaching customers. As indicated earlier in this paper in the examples
of marketing strategies used by in the Welfare to Work and CHIP
programs, direct marketing can involve first identifying sub groups
within the overall population who have the highest potential to respond
to the marketing message and then tailoring the marketing message to
these sub groups. For the Ticket to Work program, these sub groups of
Ticket recipients could be identified in terms of age, work history,
length of time on SSA disability benefits, and current work status. The
direct marketing possibilities for the Ticket to Work are discussed in
the following discussion on marketing the Ticket to SSA beneficiaries.

IV. **Marketing the Ticket to SSA Beneficiaries**[^5]

Currently, based on the rollout schedule established by the Social
Security Administration for the Ticket to Work, beneficiaries of SSI or
SSDI receive their Tickets through the mail from the Program Manager,
Maximus. The Ticket packet contains a Ticket to Work and information
describing the Ticket program. A toll free number for Maximus
(1-866-YOUR TICKET/1-866- 968-7842) is provided in the packet, and
Ticket recipients are encouraged to call this number to find out about
Employment Networks in their area. The toll free line at Maximus is
answered by an Employment Network Consultant (ENC) who will talk to the
Ticket holder about employment needs and interests and will give contact
information for the EN options in the caller's local area (Maximus,
2003c). Ticket holders also have a web site available at Maximus -
<http://www.yourtickettowork.com/th_faqs> **--** that provides a variety
of information for Ticket holders, including a directory of current ENs.
A locator is provided at the web site that can be used to sort ENs by
zip code, City, or County. Contact information is provided for each EN,
as well as information on the services that EN provides and the
disability areas served.

As of February 10, 2003, SSA reports that over 2.8 million Tickets have
been mailed and approximately 13,285 Tickets had been assigned to ENs
(SSA, 2003). This SSA report represents a Ticket assignment rate to ENs
of approximately ½ of 1% of Tickets. These response figures indicate
that current marketing efforts to Ticket recipients are generating only
a very minimal response by Ticket holders. The purpose of this section
of the paper is to review potential factors that are limiting the
success of the marketing efforts to Ticket recipients and to describe
marketing strategies that have the potential to expand interest of
Ticket holders in using the Ticket to achieve a desired employment
outcome.

As a preface to a discussion on marketing Tickets to beneficiaries, it
is important to note an example of what a Ticket holder would find if
he/she sought information from the Maximus hotline or Web site for the
EN resources serving the city of Richmond, Virginia. Richmond, a
mid-sized city of approximately 200,000, is the state capitol. Virginia
is a second phase rollout state for the Ticket, so SSI/SSDI
beneficiaries living in Richmond City are currently receiving Tickets. A
search on January 26, 2003 of the Maximus Web site of ENs for Richmond,
Virginia identified 9 EN options: The Department for the Blind and
Vision Impaired; the Department of Rehabilitative Services (the general
VR agency for Virginia); and seven out-of-state ENs located, for
example, in Texas, Florida, Nevada, Washington D.C. and Connecticut
(Maximus, 2003b). A number of these out-of-state ENs did not provide a
toll-free phone number. A Richmond City resident seeking a Richmond
based EN option has only the state VR agencies or out of state ENs where
the Ticket holder has limited to no opportunity for face to face
discussion of employment interests and service needs. To contact the
out-of-state ENs who do not offer toll free telephone lines, the Ticket
recipient will need to incur the expense of the phone contact, which can
be a financial burden and disincentive. The need to market more
effectively to ENs is addressed elsewhere in this paper. However, a key
to successful efforts in marketing to Ticket holders will be the EN
resource options available for them to pursue employment objectives with
confidence and support. The marketing issues related to the Ticket for
ENs and Ticket holders are inseparably linked and must be addressed in
tandem.

The Ticket to Work is designed as a tool for SSI and/or SSDI
beneficiaries to use in pursuing employment outcomes. As stated earlier,
marketing the Ticket to beneficiaries involves marketing employment to
them. **It is the premise of this discussion that SSA must refocus its
marketing efforts for the Ticket to Work to address the employment
related fears, interests and support needs of Ticket recipients.** The
Ticket is just one tool, though potentially a critically important tool,
in helping a SSI/SSDI recipient achieve an employment outcome.

The current marketing strategies to Ticket Holders have a number of
limitations. First, the current marketing efforts start with a mailing
to the individual, but there is no planned follow-up with Ticket
recipients on how to help address the many anxieties experienced by
Social Security disability beneficiaries around work. Second, the
marketing effort is not differentiated to various segments among the
Ticket recipients who potentially have a higher comparative employment
profile, such as individuals who:

-   Are in certain age ranges that potentially have a greater interest
    in working at SGA level, such as 18-35.

-   Have worked within the last 5 years.

-   Are currently working part-time.

Third, the current Ticket marketing effort does not strive aggressively
to support community level partnerships that would potentially help make
the Ticket holder fully aware of the how work would affect Social
Security disability benefits. For example, in Oklahoma, there is a
partnership among an advocacy organization, local ENs, the One Stop
Center, and the State VR agency working together to provide a full range
of information and support on work and disability benefits to Ticket
holders. This example is described in detail at the end of this section.

Fourth, the marketing effort, as indicated by Ticket assignment figures
to date, does not effectively help to engage the Ticket holder in an
employment service and support plan leading to an employment outcome.
These limitations must be addressed in revised efforts to market the
Ticket to Work to beneficiaries.

**Key Considerations in Developing a Marketing Plan to Ticket Holders**

There are at least four key considerations in developing an employment
oriented marketing plan for Ticket holders. These include:

1.  The Ticket holder's age, work history, and disability related
    employment issues.

2.  The Social Security disability benefits being received and the
    specific considerations affecting SSI benefits as compared to SSDI,

3.  The specific services and supports needed for Ticket holders to
    achieve and maintain employment outcomes and the partnerships
    potentially needed for these services to blend together
    successfully.

4.  Community-level partnerships and strategies that effectively support
    Ticket holders pursuing employment outcomes.

A brief discussion of each of these considerations follows.

**Age, Work History, and Disability Related Employment Issues.**
Currently, the Ticket marketing strategy to beneficiaries does not
differentiate based on considerations such as age, work history, and
disability related employment issues. For example, youth in the
transition period from secondary level education will potentially have
different issues (i.e. family concerns about work and impact on SSA
disability benefits, lack of employment experience, interest in post
secondary training/education) related to work than middle aged to older
adults. The disability related employment issues of individuals who have
severe and persistent mental illness are very different, for example,
from individuals with developmental disabilities (Bond et al, 2001;
Wehman & Revell, 2003). The age, work history, and disability of Ticket
recipients all impact their fears, interests, and needs related to
employment, particularly when SGA level earnings that will result in
loss of cash benefits are involved, as found with the Ticket to Work.

**Social Security Disability Benefits Received.** The impact of
employment on disability benefits is different for SSI and SSDI
recipients. Earnings below SGA level impact SSI and SSDI benefits
differently. The SGA thresholds are different for SSI and SSDI
recipients. SSDI recipients are individuals who have a work history;
many SSI recipients do not have a work history. When approaching SSI
and/or SSDI beneficiaries about using the Ticket, the differences in
work histories and how earnings impact their benefits must be built into
the marketing strategy.

**Services and Supports Needed to Achieve Employment Outcomes.** For
disability beneficiaries to utilize their Tickets, there is a need for a
diverse set of EN options. This need is most strongly indicated by the
variety of workplace and related supports used by individuals with
disabilities to be successful in employment. For example, there are a
number of research-based practices that have demonstrated effectiveness
in assisting individuals with severe mental illness. These include use
of a rapid job search approach, individualizing job placements according
to the individuals work preferences, long term maintenance of follow
along supports, and close integration of the employment services with
the employment supports (Bond et al, 2001). The services and supports
needed to achieve a successful employment outcome vary considerably
across the full range of individuals with a disability who are Ticket
holders. [For these individuals to make the commitment to work as
required by the Ticket, they will need to be confident that the
individualized supports each one will need are truly available in their
community]{.underline}. This critical point reflects the dominant theme
of this paper: For the Ticket to Work program to be successful, there
most be ENs and EN partnerships available in the Ticket holders'
communities that will commit to providing needed services and supports.

**Community-level partnerships and strategies that effectively support
Ticket holders pursuing employment outcomes.** The implementation plan
for marketing the Ticket to beneficiaries must incorporate the multiple
factors impacting the decision a SSI or SSDI recipient makes regarding
employment and use of the Ticket. The marketing plan must recognize that
for most beneficiaries, the decision about using the Ticket and pursuing
employment at an SGA level of earnings will first involve a full
understanding of the impact of work on benefits. This decision will also
involve identifying an EN that is responsive to the Ticket holders'
needs and expectations in terms of job preferences and the availability
of follow along supports to help the individual work through pre- and
post-employment concerns. In other words, SSA should segment the market
and develop marketing strategies for the unique subcultures represented
in the disability community. Several disability clusters comprise the
SSA disability rolls; developmental disabilities and mental health
represent two of the distinct advocacy and support service networks that
compromise over half of the beneficiary populations. Marketing
strategies built on existing networks within the community could rapidly
increase the market penetration of the Ticket to Work.

One such market segmentation strategy has been piloted in Oklahoma. The
Social Security Administration, through the State Partnership Initiative
project (SPI), is funding the Oklahoma Department of Rehabilitation
Services to conduct the KEYS to Employment (KEYS) Project. One of the
strategies used in KEYS is an assertive engagement approach. The
strategy involves inviting Ticket eligible SSI recipients to a session
to discuss work and the impact of work on Social Security Disability
benefits. These invitations are initially done by mail and are
followed-up with phone invitations. The invitations include offers for
assistance in arranging transportation to the information sessions.

This group information session is conducted in Oklahoma City, for
example, by a chapter of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill
(NAMI). It is important to note that the research design of the KEYS
project involves only SSI recipients who are mentally ill. At the work
session, the NAMI work incentives coordinator gives a presentation about
Social Security work incentives and how beneficiaries can be successful
in employment. Arrangements can be made for individual Benefits Planning
sessions. Representatives from the ENs in Oklahoma City attend the
sessions and give a brief presentation on their services. Arrangements
can also be made for services from the state Vocational Rehabilitation
agency through the VR counselor who attends these sessions. The
beneficiary can choose to meet individually with a potential EN at the
session or can schedule a later time for the meeting. These Work
Incentives sessions are now offered at the local One Stop Center. As a
result, the Ticket holder has in one setting full access to information
and supports that are critical to making a decision about work and
disability benefits (NAMI, 2002).

The example from Oklahoma incorporates a number of key strategies that
are critical to marketing the Ticket to beneficiaries include:

1.  Tailoring a marketing campaign to specific population sub groups
    through use of a marketing message designed to engage to targeted
    population. In the Oklahoma example, this message is "Working for
    Wellness". It is about work and the positive impact of work on
    quality of life. Although this specific wording of the marketing
    message will need to vary across populations, the key is to find a
    message that engages the targeted population in a discussion about
    work.

2.  The marketing strategy recognizes the critical role Benefits
    Planning has in a Ticket holder's decision about work and
    incorporates benefits planning into the outreach message.

3.  Discussions about use of the Ticket are initiated only after the
    concerns of the Ticket holder with work and Social Security benefits
    are explored fully.

4.  The Ticket holders have face-to-face contact with potential ENs who
    can describe their services.

5.  The co-location of resources at the One Stop makes available to the
    Ticket holder a full range of services in one setting. Also, One
    Stops are designed to link closely with the local business
    community. It is a natural setting for employers who are ENs to use
    as a place to match with Ticket holders and to form partnerships
    with service resources at the One Stop. The One Stop setting places
    Ticket outreach efforts in a key community location identified with
    work and frequented by those individuals who are seeking employment
    related assistance.

Successful marketing of the Ticket to Work to beneficiaries will involve
community level efforts that create partnerships as found in the
Oklahoma example. It is important to note that the Oklahoma approach,
with the use of NAMI (an advocacy organization), is an example of
developing contracts/partnerships with advocates and service providers.
One Stop Centers are a critically important potential hub in these
partnerships. SSA has entered into an agreement with the Department of
Labor to establish Program Navigator positions in One Stop Centers to
assist individuals with disabilities, including but not limited to
Ticket Holders, access needed services (Social Security Administration,
October 16, 2002; Gerry, M., 2002). The program navigators are an
excellent potential resource for a community level, targeted outreach
effort for the Ticket. They can incorporate information about the Ticket
into their work with individuals with disabilities and help navigate
people through an individualized decision process about work, benefits,
and use of the Ticket.

**V. Marketing the Ticket to ENs**

The employment networks (EN) play a very major role in the Ticket
implementation, perhaps significantly more than has been written about
to date or described in the available literature. As noted above, the
capacity of ENs, the number available, and their willingness to work
with Ticket holders will essentially make or break the long-term impact
of this program. The ENs' role and function are described extensively in
the Federal Register rules and regulations for the Ticket ([Federal
Register]{.underline}, Vol. [66]{.underline},, December 28, 2001).
Basically, they are the entities that are charged with providing many
vocational activities, especially the job search and ongoing employment
service supports. It must be in the ENs' best interest to help Ticket
holders maintain employment, a key to maintaining reimbursement under
the Ticket program. As noted in the Federal Register, ENs can be
charitable organizations such as local rehabilitation programs, state
agencies supervising VR programs, One Stop delivery systems under the
Workforce Investment Act, schools, or employers in business and
industry. In short, there is a wide spectrum of groups that can be ENs.

EN reporting requirements include information to assist in determining
whether a beneficiary is making timely progress toward self-sufficiency.
Additionally, they must maintain information about a beneficiary\'s work
activity and earnings so SSA can determine their effect on entitlement
to benefits, benefit amounts and payments to the EN and/or VR.

Ultimately, the critical EN question is: **Which of these entities will
want to participate in the Ticket program, and who can be effective?**
We believe that this is the cutting edge question for the success of the
Ticket program. We also believe that there are several ways that a more
targeted and intensive marketing plan could possibly improve the number
and quality of ENs. With the large number of beneficiaries, this could
be a significantly positive opportunity for individuals who want to work
competitively and also a source of payment revenue for employment
organizations. On the other hand, poor quality ENs or too few will
significantly depress the interest and demand on the part of Ticket
holders.

For example, there are several thousand supported employment community
programs (Wehman, Revell, and Kregel, 1998). Some of these have
successfully helped SSA beneficiaries with developmental disabilities
exit day programs into competitive employment and off the SSA disability
rolls. However, the majority have not. As O\'Brien (2002) notes, one of
the clear risks that an EN must absorb is that some SSA beneficiaries
maybe determined unable to work and therefore constitute a high
financial risk to the EN. With no funds appropriated for the Ticket,
then payments will come in at a low level initially, even on the
milestone program from the projected SSA savings. As an executive
director of a community rehabilitation day program, would you choose
taking a set amount of money each year (e.g., \$9500 per person for
services) that is guaranteed from the state mental health department, or
would you pick the employment outcome with lower funds from SSA that
aren\'t guaranteed? The answer is pretty obvious, which is why many of
these community programs may choose to not be heavily involved as ENs.

One possible alternative to this scenario might be if the state mental
retardation or mental health agency or local funding agency to the day
program is willing to maintain funding for SSI/SSDI clients in their
program while the Ticket is being exercised and employment support
programs are underway. In this fashion, the provider could reap the
basic day services funding AND also accrue the projected SSA savings.
Will this happen? And are providers in the community willing to try and
negotiate this? Good information and referral systems and a marketing
plan will begin to answer these questions.

We believe that traditional day programs and community rehabilitation
programs (CRP) can have a role as ENs, but financial incentives will
have to be better developed to entice them to accept more Tickets. The
CRPs have much expertise in job placement and career advancement but
many will not respond if they fear they will lose money.

Two of the most viable EN categories that should be seriously encouraged
to participate are a) public schools, and b) businesses in the
community, both of which are potential EN sectors noted by Maximus
earlier in the paper that have not responded to current marketing
efforts. Lets look at the case for public schools first, who are one of
the largest hiring entities in the country. More importantly, they are
both in the business of training personnel and often placing them into
business and industry. Most schools have some type of work experience,
vocational‑technical center, vocational education, and vocational
evaluation component in their program. While they are not usually well
experienced in job placement and employment, all of the other pieces are
in place. They could front load the funds for placement and accept the
risk since these students, for the most part, will be on a special
education entitlement for services anyway. Secondly, the schools are
under increasing pressure to place students into competitive employment
before graduating. Participating in the Ticket program would be a
possible vehicle to recoup some of these costs long term by the school
district. Third, one of the fastest growing groups of beneficiaries
going on the SSA rolls are young people, so interrupting this chain of
dependence should be appealing to local and state officials. Finally,
public schools bring many instructional and vocational resources to
problem solving and community connections not the least of which is
credibility in the employer community. Most employers have children in
schools and they may be willing to work with school programs that are
ENs.

Public schools, technical schools, and community colleges have a strong
incentive and an established funding base to prepare individuals for
work in many different careers. Using the same targeted business
strategy, it would make a great deal of sense to meet on an individual
basis with some of the larger community colleges. For example, a Dade
County Community College in Florida or a College of DuPage in the
northwest suburbs of Chicago and many of the large community colleges
throughout California may all be very receptive to being an EN. This can
best be accomplished through personal invitations to staff such as
career counseling directors in an effort to communicate directly with
them about how the Ticket can work and how it can be a benefit to them.
Many of these arrangements maybe optimal if done in a shared way with
large companies in the area or a staffing company, but there is also no
reason that a large community college could not do this as well once
they understand the program and how it could benefit them. The key issue
with community colleges and large public schools is, once again, that
they usually have the existing funding already in place to provide this
service. Receiving SSA funding from the Ticket holder over a period of
time would be considered a profitable value added activity, as well as
important social responsibility to the community.

There is a second group of businesses that require a hard look as ENs.
These are businesses involved in manpower development, placement
services, and telemarketing services, as well as large corporations who
may have specific labor demands. Good examples of large corporations are
banks, insurance companies, data processing companies or other
corporations that have unique labor needs, such as staffing a call
center. The use of the Business Leadership Networks, trade associations
like the Food Service or Hospitality associations, or local or state
chambers of commerce are all possible ENs or partnerships that could be
formed.

One powerful arrangement would be the combined or blended EN. For
example, a select business/association group combines with one school
system. This then provides the labor supply in direct conjunction with
the business/placement expertise with the two groups dividing up
whatever SSA savings accrue. There would also be the intangible
motivation of both groups to engage in a socially responsible activity
that, for example, helps students with mental retardation/developmental
disabilities have competitive employment work opportunities.

The use of the Projects with Industry (PWIs ) program within Vocational
Rehabilitation could be a very powerful means of leveraging existing
business networks. PWIs are usually long term established companies or
business associations who could be well positioned to implement the
Ticket.

**SSA Demonstrations**. In order for these opportunities to occur, we
believe that federal agencies need to test out these models through
demonstration projects in different states to see the viability of how
they unfold. Consider the power of Bank of America Corporation teaming
up with the Charlotte, North Carolina public schools as an EN. All the
above ingredients would be in place to roll out hundreds of SSA
beneficiaries over a five to 10 year period. Now amplify this across 50
more cities and some progress might begin to be made. With this as a
general background, let\'s now turn to more detail about the challenges
to implementation. The concept of demonstrations is one of the most
powerful marketing tools, i.e., \"selling by example.\" This approach
allows for trial and error innovation, experimentation, and outcome
evaluation of different strategies of marketing.

**[Challenges to Implementation]{.underline}**

In the initial roll out of the first 13 states, very few entities are
signing up to be ENs. The issues seem to be related to cost of the
start-up, limited experience in serving many disabilities, not knowing
how to do it, and a perception that the program won't work or is too
difficult to implement. Let's take a closer look at some of these
issues.

**Why Is It a Problem to be an EN?** One of the largest groups of
organizations that were initially presumed to be potential ENs were the
6000 community rehabilitation programs, most of which are non-profit
organizations. The programs known as sheltered workshops, day programs,
etc., serve hundreds of thousands of people with mental retardation,
mental illness, and severe physical disabilities, many of whom are
would-be Ticket holders. Most of their day program service funding comes
from local or state sources or Medicaid. The majority of their clients
stay in their programs for long periods of time. Most of these
non-profit organizations work with very little unrestricted cash and
rely heavily on block type funding that often has significant
restrictions as to use.

This puts the non-profit program in a position of having to identify a
way that it can support services to the Ticket holder for a period of at
least 5 years (if the individual is an SSDI person and uses work
incentives). Hence, the perception of many potential ENs is that they
will have to have to pick their clients very carefully. Clients must:

1.  Be committed to working at the Substantial Gainful Activity earnings
    level that will result in cash disability benefits from SSA
    terminating (this is a major issue);

2.  Not be in need of extensive or expensive rehabilitation services;

3.  Be willing to share information on a regular basis with the EN over
    a five-year period. (Pay stubs, etc., will require consistent
    contact and follow-up).

We have received comments from many local providers (Personal
Communication, G. Revell, January 23, 2003) that being an EN will be too
expensive and that the funds received are too delayed and insufficient
to cover expenses.

**Specific Shortcomings of Being an EN.** Clearly, making a decision to
become an EN seems almost entirely financial to many who are considering
this as an option. It appears that it really is a question of risk and
reward. SSA has set up a financial incentive package that can be very
challenging to many programs. Programs report that it does not appear to
have any direct relation to the expenditure of a) time, b) effort, or c)
financial resources committed by the EN. Many programs, it would appear,
are not even carefully studying the Ticket program. Because the Ticket
uses outcome based funding, these programs do not want to participate
(Personal Communication, L. Miller, January 17, 2003).

It would appear that the only programs that can best afford to
participate as an EN are those that would probably serve the beneficiary
anyway but would probably not provide extensive follow-along services
over the five-year period without the funding from the Ticket.

Another issue for ENs is the very small number of individuals who are
interested in full-time work as was noted in the previous section on
marketing to Ticket beneficiaries. Many persons who receive the Ticket
may not be interested in working and hence not act on the Ticket. This
leads to the following considerations. First, in a system of this
design, the only thing that could make up for the financial incentive
package would be volume, and that is simply not the case with the
Ticket, at least not yet. Consider these illustrations from Florida:

> **[Example]{.underline}:** As of February 10, 2003, Florida has over
> 440,000 tickets mailed-out and less than 1000 tickets assigned across
> the VR and the 55 ENs (SSA, 2003).

Second, the lack of a Medicaid Buy-In and the financial position of most
state\'s basic Medicaid programs have a great impact on the ability of
beneficiaries to view work as a reasonable option. The Buy-In was a
pivotal piece of the legislation and the program as a whole suffers from
the inability of states to take advantage of the great options it
allows.

> **[Example]{.underline}:** Florida had a Buy-In package that had moved
> entirely through the system and then due to some legislative
> differences and the deteriorating economy, the state completely lost
> it. Advocates need to spend all their energy on maintaining existing
> benefits, particularly the Medicaid for the working poor.

Returning to the issue of payment system, Webb (2002), in her testimony
to Congress, correctly points out these issues:

> \"...First, ENs should be able to choose on an individual case basis
> as to whether they want to use the milestone/outcome plan or outcome
> only plan. This would better enable ENs to serve people regardless of
> which work incentives they might use. Second, Congress should allow
> some form of payment even when a beneficiary does not totally leave
> benefits. I believe all work is valuable and some work is better than
> none. We are turning people away who need to work part time simply
> because the payment structure does not allow us to serve them. We are
> also turning SSI beneficiaries away whose initial earnings potential
> is not above the \$1,174 break-even point. Third, the SGA level for
> purposes of being paid should be the same for blind and non-blind
> beneficiaries.\"

The payment system is a problem, but more so for certain ENs than
others. The correct question to ask is - Which ENs can make the Ticket
system work?

**Vocational Rehabilitation and the Ticket Program.** In some states,
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) has actively discouraged agencies from
becoming ENs. SSA requires that Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies
establish Memoranda of Understanding with ENs on how VR and the EN will
work together under the Ticket program. Some VR agencies have set up the
Memorandum of Understanding agreements in such an aggressive way that
most agencies would be foolish to accept Tickets. An example of this
type of agreement is where VR puts short-times frames on the EN for
repayment of funds VR spends on a beneficiary who has assigned his/her
Ticket to a non-VR EN and used the services of the VR agency. In a few
cases, VR has also tended to be publicly very negative about the Ticket.
Many local agencies that have a fee-for-service relationship with VR
would rather just stay in the fee-based relationship with VR and not
really examine whether the Ticket program can work. A detailed
discussion of Vocational Rehabilitation and ENs is beyond the scope and
focus of this paper. The intent here is mainly to note that VR does
influence the response of potential ENs in the community, particularly
those potential ENs who are community rehabilitation service programs
with financial ties to VR. The VR influence on ENs also reinforces the
point made often in this paper that a more diverse array of ENs must
become available. Business is not financially dependent on VR and is
therefore less likely to be influenced as an EN than a program who must
weigh its involvement with the Ticket against its financial ties to a VR
agency that is resistant to the Ticket program.

**ENs: Why Aren\'t They Taking Tickets?** There is also the issue of why
ENs are signing up, but not taking any tickets. For example, many
agencies are signing up just in case the \"perfect candidate\" shows up
at their door. This means a person who costs nothing to serve and who is
on the brink of benefits cessation. Important considerations in
analyzing the reasons why ENs are hesitant to take Tickets are concerns
that have been voiced regarding the payment structure of the Ticket to
Work. These concerns (Wehman & Revell, 2003) include:

-   The milestones-outcome and outcome performance-based funding
    strategies in the Ticket to Work do not pay ENs consistently at a
    payment level and payment schedule that reflects the costs involved
    in providing employment services.

-   ENs assume the primary cost risk in providing services under the
    Ticket because SSA mainly makes back-end payments well after the
    early high-cost period for employment service providers. This higher
    cost period usually occurs during job acquisition and the first 60
    days of employment.

-   SSA is using a fixed goal of employment at a Substantial Gainful
    Activity (SGA) earnings level that results in the termination of
    cash benefits through SSI and SSDI. No payments are made under the
    Ticket to ENs when earnings are less than SGA.

A detailed analysis of the Ticket to Work payment structure is beyond
the scope and focus of this paper. However, it is important to note that
EN concerns with the Ticket's payment policies are a contributing factor
to some ENs apparently having very limited intentions of ever accepting
a Ticket. These agencies are not acting wisely; they cannot see any of
the positive aspects of the Ticket program or figure out how to make it
work because it is so very different from the way they are accustomed to
doing business. Ultimately, this destroys the credibility of the EN and
the Ticket program in general to SSA beneficiaries.

**Solutions to Ticket Implementation Issues**

As stated above, there have been many complaints about the effectiveness
of the Ticket to Work program and how to best implement this innovative
new program. The challenge is to create meaningful solutions within the
available statute and regulations that are currently available. It would
appear that there are several ways that a more targeted and intensive
marketing plan could possibly affect the number and quality of ENs that
are presently available. In this section we will present several ideas
on how SSA could create a diverse array of Employment Networks.

**[Targeted Marketing to High Profile Companies]{.underline}**. To date
it would appear that the majority of marketing efforts to ENs has been
under the heading of large scale direct flyer mail outs to a mass number
of community rehabilitation programs that are on readily available
mailing lists in the private and public rehabilitation sector.
Additionally, face to face seminars and periodic email marketing are
being conducted in states where the Ticket is now available. However, as
noted in the section earlier on Marketing Principles, it may be much
more efficient to identify public companies that are large and well
capitalized in the business arena and that might be interested and
willing to participate in as an EN in the Ticket program.

Specifically, in major cities where there are large numbers of Tickets
that have been issued, it would be of value for the Program Manager or
another SSA designated entity to meet one to one or in a very small
groups with senior human resource personnel of corporations to inform
them of the Ticket program, how it works and what benefits there may be
to the corporation. While this would be time consuming, the utilization
of local and state business roundtables, trade associations, and
personal networks could allow for the careful identification of
companies who have a history in their labor force of hiring personnel
with SSI or SSDI background. More importantly, once several large
companies in a state become ENs, others will begin to seriously consider
the viability of this form for their own company. There are definite
spillover effects that can occur.

**Hence, carefully targeting a message about the Ticket program to
specific large corporations in high Ticket density areas would be one
way to ameliorate the current limitations of the EN pool.** It is
important to recognize that many large companies, such as HealthSouth or
Washington Mutual or Philip Morris, may already be hiring SSI or SSDI
individuals who may have a Ticket or will be receiving a Ticket shortly.
If the company can be helped through the EN establishment process, it
may turn out over a five to ten year period to be a very value-added
proposition for the company. Certainly, a large corporation that is
already going to hire the individual anyway would have an incentive to
take the Ticket and the subsequent SSA funds that would follow with
successful employment.

**Employers may well become the dominant numbers of ENs, that is,
employers without other organizations.** In fact, one could argue that
this is the primary group that most marketing efforts should be directed
toward because they have the most to benefit financially from the Ticket
To Work Program. Utilizing community rehabilitation programs, One Stop
Centers, and other intermediaries is an inefficient use of the Ticket.
One only has to consider that every SSI or SSDI beneficiary who
surrenders his or her Ticket to a company that is a certified EN
functionally serves as a potential five-year tax credit for that
company. In the case of Ticket holders, of course, they must earn beyond
the SGA and get to a zero cash benefit. Admittedly, there are
certifications of wage statements that are necessary in other forms that
need to be filled out in order to get appropriate reimbursement. Once
this process is established, like any other tax credit type program, the
long-term benefits to employers could be substantial.

**[Targeting Staffing Companies]{.underline}**. **A further modification
of the aforementioned business-targeting plan would be to especially
focus on supplemental staffing companies who have an especially large
incentive to become an EN**. As will be noted later in this paper
through an extensive Question and Answer section and small case study,
it is very clear that supplemental staffing companies are in a uniquely
positive situation when it comes to making the Ticket program work.
Remember - these are corporations that are highly skilled in screening,
training, and placing personnel. Their profits depend on how well they
do this and, therefore, accepting individuals with the Ticket who are
going to be placed into other companies for which the supplemental
staffing company receives a fee makes it advantageous for all involved.
The opportunity for sharing fees, reducing paperwork, etc., are all
available. Webb (2002), in her pilot work in Arizona, has already shown
this to be the case. Manpower, Inc. has also recognized this with its
recently approved EN status and pilot plans for implementation.

**[Concentrated Efforts with Trade Associations]{.underline}**. Clearly,
meeting with state Chambers of Commerce, the U. S. Chamber of Commerce,
the National Federation of Independent Business, the National Hotel and
Restaurant Association and other trade associations would be another
obvious and logical way to target the business community. The marketing
strategy here would be to utilize these associations as major marketing
agents to smaller companies that are in the \$100 million to \$1 billion
a year revenue area and help explain to them how the Ticket program
might work. Companies in this revenue category tend to be growing more
rapidly in a percentage basis than Fortune 100 companies and often their
organic growth (meaning greater revenues on the basis of expanded
product sales, not such through acquisition of other companies) results
in a need for greater labor at different points in time, depending, of
course on the business cycle. Identifying these companies can be
difficult, and gaining their trust, equally difficult.

**Therefore the use of local and state Chambers of Commerce and trade
associations as agents to help participate in this process, possibly
even in a consortium, would be another approach.** It is very common for
many businesses in different industries to establish consortiums and
cartel-like arrangements for greater buying power. There is no reason
that this same approach could not be used in sharing the number of
Tickets that might be surrendered, but it does require one association
to help blend perhaps several companies together.

As an example of this, consider the possibility if Office Max, Staples,
Inc., and several larger independent office supply groups within a given
region all deciding to have one entry point for Ticket holders and share
the cost of administering the program in a given part of the state. This
type of arrangement would allow for sharing of the administrative costs
and also expanding the large base of Ticket holders that might come in
and be distributed in any one company.

**[Descriptive Use of the Internet]{.underline}**. There is no question
that the Internet and targeted email could be a very powerful way to
elevate the awareness of the Ticket program. However, without carefully
targeted mailings, this is also a wasted effort and highly inefficient.
Consequently, it would make the most sense to identify specific links
such as [www.careerbuilders.com](http://www.careerbuilders.com/) or
[www.hotjobs.com](http://www.hotjobs.com/) or any of a number of
employment links that are available. The Internet is an enormously
positive way of being efficient, but the Program Manager or the SSA
designated entity needs to much more fully develop an EN web site. At
this point, the Internet site is instructive, but it is it not a
marketing tool. **The web site needs to be a major effort at selling why
being an EN has value, how different companies and ENs are making it
work, and the positive value that it provides to the community via a
societal marketing philosophy, as well as to the** **company or EN
bottom line.**

There needs to be a careful analysis of the positive aspects of being an
EN and then this should be presented on a dynamic continually changing
web site that provides attractive case study illustrations and linkages.
At this point in the infancy of the Ticket to Work program
implementation, targeted marketing and the use of the Internet with
specific efforts at trying to segment effort has been very limited.
There is little doubt that if continued effort is made to market to
community rehabilitation programs, the growth of ENs taking large
numbers of Tickets will be very limited. The incentive for local
community rehabilitation programs is not strong since many of these
programs do not have as their primary goal immediate employment. It is
important to recognize that is exactly what the Ticket is all about -
employment. Therefore, a primary criterion for an EN should be that it
has the capacity to deliver on sustained employment. Programs that do
not have a sufficient track record of doing that will probably fail
because they do not have the incentive or capacity to support sustained
employment.

**[Creating Meaningful Networks]{.underline}**. The whole network idea
seems to have eluded many people, despite the fact that the very name of
the entity is Employment Network. Yet blending of different
organizational entities as alluded to earlier with trade associations as
one EN could be very powerful, indeed. This example was noted earlier in
the discussion of Bank of America and Charlotte, N. C. Public Schools
teaming up together. Many people may feel that there is not enough money
to share, and it is true that networking can be a cumbersome process and
has not been the typical way of doing business, at least in the
community rehabilitation sector. However, as noted earlier in the
discussion of consortiums and cartels in business, working together and
teaming up is often the way the business sector works.

Clearly, one argument for utilization of networks is that if Ticket
holders are not well qualified for positions within a company, which is
often going to be the case, then having a partner who is involved in the
preparation of vocational skills and sharing in the Ticket
administration responsibilities may be useful. One recent comment from
an individual who has been administrating an EN within a corporate
setting noted

> \"Yes, we are an approved employment network for Ticket to Work
> participants through the SSA program. I have had significant time
> watching the development of the SSA initiative....\"
>
> We are \"playing\" with it minimally right now and not finding the
> participants to be of appropriate levels for return to work. I can
> discuss this in greater detail .... And we will be meeting with SSA in
> the near future to discuss in more depth\" (author anonymous, 2003).

In this particular situation, this corporation would have appreciated
having a partner that was involved in the recruiting, screening, and
training aspect before the actual placement in employment. The creation
of networks that could lead into long-term strategic relationships and
partnerships would seem to be one solution to long-term marketing impact
nationwide.

**[Development of Self-Employment ENs]{.underline}.**[^6] The hesitancy
of ENs to use the Ticket is magnified when a person with a disability
seeks self-employment. The absence of cost reimbursement, coupled with
the fact that self-employment is an emerging technique for people with
significant disabilities, increases programmatic fear and hesitancy to
encourage personal choice. The Ticket also appears flawed in two
critical ways when addressing business ownership. The first issue
concerns the fact that the Social Security Administration will reimburse
ENs only for countable net earnings of SGA or higher. Therefore, ENs are
penalized when individuals wisely put money back into their business for
stability and growth. The individual business owner may also feel
pressure by the EN to take increased net wages in order for the EN to
capture milestone payments, but such short-term thinking could
jeopardize the long-term health and survival of the enterprise (Marsha
Katz, Personal Communication, January 29, 2003).

The other related issue concerns the use of the Subsidy work incentive
that allows wage employees to report decreased countable earnings if
they receive or purchase work supports. Evidence of a subsidy applied
against the gross earnings of a wage employee is used to delay SGA, but
it does not impact the EN's payments based on gross earnings at or above
SGA. It appears that Subsidy cannot be applied to net self-employment
earnings; therefore, benefits cannot be protected (Griffin & Hammis, In
Press).

The larger ENs though may be able to take these risks and also help
people with disabilities incubate small enterprises. Large companies,
not-for-profits, school districts, and other EN configurations might use
self-employment candidates in their supply chain, just as many companies
now use minority-owned businesses. For instance, consider the vision of
Microsoft becoming an EN. They might match a potential small business
owner's interest in children with the company's need for childcare for
their employees. Microsoft could house the day care center and treat it
as any other contractor. The location of the childcare business within
Microsoft would guarantee a steady flow of customers. Microsoft in
essence gets a needed service, receives Ticket payments, and essentially
guarantees the success of the enterprise. The scale could also be easily
increased by Microsoft putting these day care centers in all their
buildings owned by one Ticket recipient or by many who also shared the
interest in childcare.

In another vision of this use of the Ticket program, Office Depot might
create similar opportunities by matching Ticket holders to each of their
stores' internal Copy Shops across the country. Office Depot already
outfits copy shops in many of its stores, so it uses the existing
infrastructure by, in essence, giving it to the Ticket holder who then
runs the copy shop as an independent contractor. The Ticket offsets
training and some of the equipment, and profits from sales are used to
reimburse the initial Office Depot investment. In effect, Office Depot
receives a subsidy from SSA to establish a value-added customer service
in the form of a privately owned, but co-located (business within a
business) copy center.

The applications are endless. A Ticket holder with an interest in baking
might be supported by a school district that functions as an EN. The
school uses the Ticket for baking equipment and then guarantees it will
buy cookies for all its schools from the baker. The school thereby
insures the success of the baker and the baker has a steady income that
allows them to concentrate on product quality and growing the business.

The above mentioned self-employment disincentives in Ticket to Work are
considerable, even to large, wealthy ENs. In the case of smaller,
community rehabilitation programs, these disincentives and the lack of
personnel knowledgeable in the many facets of self-employment for people
with disabilities will contribute to the slow adoption of Ticket as a
viable incentive to productive work (Griffin & Hammis, In Press).

**[Branding]{.underline}.** Johnson (2002) notes the incredible power of
branding in the overall marketing mix. He indicates that a brand is very
different than the actual product. A product, as we noted earlier, is
something that is produced to function in existing reality. A brand,
however, has meaning **beyond** functionality and exists in people\'s
minds. Think of the swoosh symbol for Nike. What feelings and
associations does that convey beyond the mere symbol? What should happen
with any new program is that it needs to be branded positively in such a
way that it communicates to many people a positive image and, more
importantly, something that they would like to be part of. In the
current marketing literature, the Program Manager has created a web site
called [www.yourtickettowork.com](http://www.yourtickettowork.com/).
That web site bears a clever name and gives a suggestion that perhaps
using the term \'ticket\' and the term \'work\', a highly creative
public relations firm like Fleischmann-Hilliard could come up with a
physical symbol or graphic to go with a name or an expression that would
help create more of a \'buzz\' about the entire Ticket to Work Program.
Presently, there is a great deal of confusion about what the Ticket to
Work Program is and is not, whom it can serve and whom it cannot. The
Ticket program can appear to many to be just another Federal program
that is bureaucratic in nature.

The goals of the Ticket program are not representative of a limited
public initiative bound by limits imposed by federal bureaucracy. The
Ticket is about work, improving quality of life and economic
independence, informed choice, and protected health care. The perception
and understanding of the Ticket program needs to be elevated for both
Ticket holders and potential ENs. Strong branding like \"If you have the
ticket\--We have the work!\" done thousands of times under different
marketing media might be one way that ENs could market their services to
ticket holders. The "Working for Wellness" theme of the Oklahoma KEYS
project example described earlier represents a very targeted branding
message for a specific population. Clearly, the Ticket program needs a
specific identity that breaks it away from other heavily subsidized
federal employment programs provided under different rehabilitation
statutes. There is not at this point any clear brand or logo associated
with the Ticket to Work Program. This would be an important solution to
overcoming the earlier barriers that were mentioned.

**[Saturation Advertising in Niche Markets]{.underline}.** Earlier in
this paper, the importance of identifying markets was discussed where
there are a high number of ticket holders that ENs could focus upon
recruiting into their program. However, it was noted also in the
marketing principles section that advertising through radio, television,
newspaper, or other less expensive medium needs to be done in a highly
saturated fashion, meaning repeatedly over concentrated periods of time.
When one considers how General Motors sells zero percent financing for
\$35,000 to \$45,000 sports utility vehicles, how long-distance
telephone carriers sell services, or timeshare vacation marketers
approach potential buyers through telemarketing, it is not hard to see
that powerful amounts of repetition (admittedly to an obnoxious level at
times) is an essential part of getting a response. In order to fully
implement the Ticket in a limited number of target areas and be very
successful, saturated advertising would appear to be essential. This is
especially true in trying to reach beneficiaries but may also be true in
terms of recruiting non-traditional ENs such as Community Colleges and
businesses that might normally not have considered participating.

To see better how these ideas and the potential for business sector ENs
might play out if better marketed, we conducted a case study of
Manpower, Inc. and its approach to becoming an EN. The following is a
highly informative Q and A discussion on how Manpower, Inc. has begun to
develop as an EN. It is a look at how a major staffing corporation went
about the thought process in planning and implementing being an EN.
Manpower\'s plan is to develop a structure that will support a continuum
of temporary work assignments leading into their temp-to-perm positions.
The senior author asked the questions with several management personnel
from Manpower, Inc. providing the responses and reviews.

**Case Study: Manpower, Inc.: Becoming An EN**[^7]

**Question: When did Manpower first start thinking about being an EN?**

The first time was back in 2001 at a meeting with SSA held at Suntrust
Bank. Manpower was asked to present to SSA. This started Millie Hewett,
District Manager in Richmond Virginia, to start thinking about the
possibilities. The second time was at a meeting at VCU with Howard Green
and Paul Wehman from VCU, and Don Johnston, General Manager and Senior
Vice President of Manpower, Southeast Region, and Millie Hewitt, Area
Sales Manager from Richmond, Virginia on October 27,2002. Don is located
in Atlanta. During the meeting VCU presented the idea of Manpower being
very aggressive in getting out and becoming an EN. Don Johnston was
excited about the possibilities of doing this in his region. At the same
time TechReach Director, Branka Minic of Manpower was working with other
agencies studying whether Manpower should be an EN. The idea to become
an EN came almost at the same time from several of our offices and
through our corporate contacts and national partnerships. TechReach is
Manpower\'s nationwide workforce development program focused on creating
opportunities for unemployed and underemployed, and includes initiatives
related to individuals with disabilities. Subsequently in November there
were two conference calls between the VCU personnel and Millie Hewitt,
Branka Minic, and Don Johnston of Manpower to discuss the issues
involved with becoming an EN.

**Question: What were some of the initial questions and concerns, which
resulted from your discussions?**

1.  One of things we did [once we decided we wanted to proceed was to
    look at the application to be an EN. Some of the concerns were about
    the document itself (application) It appeared that the application
    was written for service providers or public sector]{.underline}. For
    example one concern was about confidentially which would require
    Manpower offices to have special systems in place to protect and
    safeguard the confidentially of personal information about
    beneficiaries. Another question was a statement in the application
    that required coordinating and delivering vocational rehabilitation
    services and other support services which is not one of our core
    businesses. We had to go back to Maximus to get some clarification
    on these questions. If was during our discussions with Maximus that
    we realized that as long as we had the systems and HR functions in
    place we were ok and didn't have to do anything different. We
    learned that we didn't have to offer rehab service but could partner
    with the rehabilitation agency.

2.  Another question [corporate headquarters had was regarding the
    statement in the application about employing staff and or utilizing
    providers who are qualified, certified or licensed in assisting
    beneficiaries with disabilities]{.underline}. The answer was that
    Manpower was not required to have any certified or licensed staff in
    addition to our regular employees.

3.  Another concern was the statement [that we had to have agreements
    with other ENs and State Rehabilitation Agencies- It seemed we were
    required to have these agreements]{.underline}. After talking with
    Maximus we learned that wasn't true. We could decide to have
    agreement and if we did then we had to send the agreement to
    Maximus.

4.  [The record-keeping piece was another area of concern]{.underline}.
    Similar to the welfare to work and WOTC we needed to decide if we
    were going to track this with our own staff or contract out for that
    service. The good thing about the ticket is that SSA assumes the
    responsibility to be the administrator.

**Question: Why does Manpower want to do this?**

First we are already doing it. It is just not connected to the Ticket to
Work program. We are very conscious today that people still say it is
right thing to do. It is not the right thing to do. We have been doing
this for 12 years and it is a business thing to do. Also, we see there
is a revenue stream tied to it. We can be on the cutting edge. Manpower,
as a Fortune 500 company can use this as marketing tool.

**Question: Did the question of how this will impact the bottom line
come into the discussions with corporate headquarters?**

Absolutely, Cost efficiency was an issue! One thing we did was look at
Virginia. We have 43 manpower locations (offices). If only 25 of these
offices were successful and made 10 placements that would be account for
250 placements. If they all qualified for the total payment that would
add 1 million dollars to our bottom line. That is a substantial amount
of money.

**Question: Did you discuss who else needs to be involved with this
internal and external from Manpower**

We will look to VCU-RRTC to help us with training and resources and
Manpower has great confidence in you. We have great relationships with
State Vocational Rehabilitation programs in all of the pilot states;
also our relationships with our business networks are good. We can call
on these resources for training & support. This was a selling point to
our corporate headquarters. It was nice having the relationships
established and we didn't have to start from scratch.

**Question: How about discussions on selecting specific disability
groups to target for the ticket.**

In early discussion there were conversations that Manpower should target
certain disabilities. It was discussed that we should work with certain
groups that we are comfortable with or our staff would be comfortable
with serving. I (Millie) was adamant that this was not the way to go. If
we were going to be diverse we will need to embrace all people. If we
have jobs and a person comes to us no matter what the disability we
should place him. If we don't think we can place him then it would be
unfair to take the ticket. But we shouldn't base that on the disability
but the job market and type of jobs in the community. We should be
referring them to other ENs who may be better able to serve that person.
This is where the partnerships will be helpful. We don't want to just
take tickets and then be unsuccessful. We want to make sure we can
assist the person. We make decisions every day about helping people or
not, so this is not different from our normal operations. The decision
will be made on the jobs and the candidate and not the disability.

**Question: Do you think you will partner with other ENs?**

We have talked about it but we haven't made a decision. We already have
some nice relationships but that may evolve as we go forward. That may a
part of our training rollout. We may find that in one city we may need
to partner and in another area we don't.

**Question: Do you think you will offer incentives to the customer (end
users) ticket holders, and other ENs?**

Again we see the need to do this but we may want to see how the pilot
goes. I am thinking that the person may require an incentive to
surrender his ticket. At this time in our proposal (application) we
don't list any incentives.

There is one thing I want to offer here is that the process for approval
to be an EN should be quicker. I looked at the web site yesterday and we
were not listed. However, the first one listed on the site said they
were splitting the ticket 75% to the ticket holder and the EN keeps 25%.

**Question: Where is Manpower in the process of being an EN?\
**

Maximus had requested additional information almost a month ago and we
still are waiting to hear about the decision. I called Maximus yesterday
they said they hadn't received all of the information so we sent it
again. I went through four people before I could find out what was
happening with the application. So I see some red tape creeping up. When
I talked to Maximus in Nov they said it shouldn't take but another week
or two. It has been a month or more.

**Question: How do you think your staff will react to this in the pilot
states?**

Our corporate directions this year is to pursue additional revenue
streams, develop additional workforce development strategies and make
sure our staff are in the mainstream. Corporate is asking us to develop
stronger ties with education institutions. The new direction is from the
top and Don Johnston, the Regional V. P. for the Southeast part of the
U. S., sees this as a key part of the objectives in the Southeast
region.

**Question: What are the next steps?**

We are waiting to get the approval from SSA and Maximus before we do
training and marketing. Also, we are waiting for the Performance
standards from Maximus.

The big education piece is to make sure our staff understands that the
surrender of the ticket is voluntary. This is critical. We don't want to
just market for tickets. We need to do additional awareness training.

We want to have a marketing program in place to let the people know what
we offer and what training opportunities we offer.

We will have one key person in each office responsible for this program.
Once approved we will do some web site modification and announcements.

**Question: What are the risks?**

It is pretty risk free except for training & education of our staff and
making sure that they understand that we will do what we do best. We
will be measuring the number of tickets and make sure we are being
successful. There are 2 things in this for Manpower. The first is to
increase revenue and the second is it gives us another pool of
candidates.

The biggest obstacles we see are:

a\) Time management issues - Some of the staff say this will take us
more time and the reporting will be too much. However, we hope this will
be seamless with Maximus since they are doing a lot of the work;

b\) The issue of working with the customer on benefits planning. We will
need help on this and make sure our staff understands that this is not
something we do. We hope we can count on the BPAO's and VCU's training
and information to help us, and

c\) The other area is at the end of the day or pilot we don't want to
learn that we have worked and placed a lot of people however they had
given their ticket to Department of Rehabilitative Services but we have
employed them all. We will need to look at the partnership with the
Department of Rehabilitative Services.

**Manpower, Inc.: Case Study Current Status Report**

Manpower\'s application to be an EN was approved in January 2003, and it
has been notified that they are officially an EN under the Ticket to
Work program. They have decided to implement the program first as a
pilot in four states: Virginia, Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi. These
state were carefully selected because of the strength and experience of
their management teams in those states, the number of ticket holders in
those states and the client relationships Manpower has in those markets.

The next steps for implementation will be to prepare a communication
plan to educate the Manpower organization on this program. Further they
will be going through the training available for new ENs. Also they hope
to incorporate this program into their standard intake process. They are
then going to work on marketing plans for candidates, clients and
partners. Necessary reports will be prepared to closely monitor the
results of the program. It is their expectation for the program to be
very successful and therefore, is tentatively targeting national rollout
for later in 2003.

#### Recommendations

We believe that the implementation of a meaningful marketing plan for
attracting SSA beneficiaries into the Ticket program and, at the same
time, matching them with appropriate ENs will need to be built from a
local level initially. We think that the concept of a national marketing
initiative, which presumes to heavily market in **ALL** Ticket states to
**ALL** SSA beneficiaries and potential ENs equally, will be a failed
strategy. In fact, when one looks at other similar efforts and
innovations, such as the supported employment programs in the 1980s and
early 1990s, it is clear that systems change states were funded for
innovative practice with special concentration on local programs that
were responsive to change (Mank and Revell, 2001). The Ticket to Work is
an innovation, a new approach that may or may not be statutorily flawed;
however, at this point it is probably safe to say that not enough time
has elapsed to evaluate whether all strategies are unable to work.

The systematic building of strong ENs that have the capacity to target
select SSA beneficiaries who are Ticket holders and want to work is the
first step in strengthening the Ticket program. Clearly, a major
marketing initiative coming from SSA and other federal agencies would be
efforts to specifically fund collaborative partnerships, corporations,
and other interested entities in demonstrating the best ways that some
of the strategies presented in this paper might be effectively
implemented.

For example, it would make much greater sense to pair together, as major
illustrations of how ENs and EN consortia can be built, Motorola
Corporation with the College of DuPage Community College (two very large
entities in the western suburbs of Chicago), J. W. Marriott with
Montgomery County Schools, J. C. Penney and the Dallas County Public
Schools or a local community college. Furthermore, if in fact the
supplemental staffing model is as viable as we believe, it will be
important for Social Security and other federal agencies to promote,
support, and disseminate the Manpower efforts that are made in helping
to implement the Ticket successfully. The success of the Ticket will be
measured not only by the number of Tickets that are actually acted upon,
but also by the number of competent and effective ENs that emerge
throughout the country and help create sufficient competition for Ticket
holders to have real choices.

We should not assume that ENs will be the same as local rehabilitation
programs. Many will probably be new entities from those that the federal
government has utilized in the past for employment related services for
individuals with a disability. Therefore, it will be crucial to seed the
Ticket marketing program with additional federal agency funds and
support to give it a true chance to get started. Highly targeted
marketing is a key to helping ENs emerge as a focused source of
planning, education, and employment support for Ticket holders
interested in going to work.

As has been noted throughout this paper, the true hidden strength of the
Ticket program lies within the private sector. Once companies like
Marriott, Pizza Hut, etc., have fully examined the Ticket program, there
could be an incredible upsurge in quality ENs. They could provide
rehabilitation services themselves and accept tickets, greatly reducing
the role of state VR programs. Although at present VR agencies do not
appear to have EN agreements in place with large businesses, VR agencies
are starting to explore establishing partnerships with big companies to
work collaboratively on Ticket. The Delaware VR agency, for example, has
expressed interest in potentially partnering with the Discover Card
Company in its state, which offers the Boost Program, a training program
that assists individuals with a disability learn the skills needed to be
successful at Discover Card (Grant Revell, Personal Communication,
January 22, 2003). The Vermont Division of Vocational Rehabiliation has
established an EN partnership agreement with the Vermont Association of
Business, Industry, and Rehabilitation (VABIR) to build and strengthen
partnership arrangements with business and industry in Vermont related
to the Ticket to Work (Vermont Division of Vocational Rehabilitation,
2002). The Ticket is an excellent match for the Manpowers, Kelly
Services, or even Snellings of the world. These companies understand
placement, and they would think the payment mechanism was attractive.
They will accept the fees from the companies they serve plus access the
Ticket payment, which is an excellent business planning and profit
maximization strategy.

The following are 13 specific recommendations targeted to improving the
overall Ticket to Work marketing effort.

**Specific Recommendations**

1.  Create a major Marketing initiative within the Ticket to Work
    program that would implement model demonstration programs, targeted
    marketing, business recruitment coordination, and evaluation of
    outcome. Enlist the assistance of marketing specialists to help
    package and coordinate the Marketing initiative.

2.  Utilize existing resources that are working closely with the
    business community. For example, there are current initiatives in
    place with the National Chamber of Commerce and with Business
    Leadership Networks that could incorporate efforts to expand
    enrollment of businesses as ENs.

3.  In segmenting the market of Ticket holders, work closely with
    minority communities, especially African Americans and Hispanic
    American communities, to market the Ticket to Work program as a way
    to enter the nation\'s labor force by using the appropriate Chamber
    of Commerce entities and also selected based organizations.

4.  Promote use of the Small Business Administration and business trade
    associations such as the Society for Human Resource Management, and
    National Federation of Independent Business as a way to promote the
    Ticket.

5.  Establish Model Demonstration projects that show the power of
    private sector entities serving as ENs in the Ticket to Work
    program.

6.  Establish Model Demonstration projects would show the power of
    blending ENs from the private sector and public sector.

7.  Invest heavily in a Ticket to Work Internet site that is linked to
    at least 20 major business and trade associations, both nationally
    and in each state where the Ticket program has been established.

8.  Meet with at least 100 Fortune 1000 or larger corporations who would
    be willing to consider being an EN in high-density Ticket areas of
    the United States.

9.  Target specific Ticket holders for targeted marketing to include
    email, direct mail, and use of radio and television in neighborhood
    communities where these beneficiaries live.

10. Establish partnerships at the community level that combine
    information on Benefits Planning, EN options, work-related supports,
    and the Ticket to Work in outreach efforts to beneficiaries.

11. Fund demonstration efforts that test different partnership
    arrangements to determine how best to conduct outreach on the Ticket
    to Work to people who, for example, are experiencing different
    primary disabilities, are youth/young adults transitioning from
    secondary and post secondary education and training settings, and/or
    are from different ethnic backgrounds.

12. Establish a national Technical Assistance program that would collect
    and disseminate information on promising practices in establishing
    EN partnership arrangements and marketing the Ticket to Work to
    beneficiaries and that would also provide direct technical
    assistance in the areas of marketing to ENs and marketing to
    beneficiaries.

13. Require that any EN who is marketing its services on an interstate
    basis offer a Toll-free telephone line for use by Ticket holders.

14. Cultivate the Project with Industry programs and One Stop Centers as
    key community hubs for outreach to Ticket holders and linkages to
    ENs (including employers), particularly those One Stops that have
    the newly established Program Navigator positions. Projects with
    Industry is a large established program in Vocational Rehabilitation
    where there are already large employer networks established.
    Maximize the use of the Office of Disability Employment Policy and
    the Employment and Training Administration within the Department of
    Labor to promote marketing of the Ticket through the One Stops.

15. Provide research and evaluation for marketing efforts and optimal
    market segmentation for appropriate Ticket holders to be targeted
    for marketing activities.

**References**

Armstrong, G., & Kotler, P. (2002). [Marketing: An
introduction]{.underline} (6^th^ ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Bond, G., Becker, D., Drake, R., Rapp, C., Meisler, M., Lehman, A.,
Bell, M., & Blyer, C. (2001). Implementing supported employment as an
evidence-based practice. [Psychiatric Services]{.underline}. 52(3),
313-322.

[Federal Register]{.underline} December 28, 2001. 66(249), 67370-67442.
20 CFR 411.

Gerry, M. (November 12, 2002). Comments made on the Program Navigator to
the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel.

Griffin, C. & Hammis, D (IN Press). Making Self-employment Work for
People with Disabilities. Baltimore: Brookes Publishers

Growick, B. S. (July/Aug/Sept 2001) Legislative update. \"Ticket\" law
to be implemented. [The Rehabilitation Professional]{.underline}, 18.

Johnson, P. (November 12, 2002). Leveraging marketing power to advance
SSA Ticket to Work. Comments made by Paul Johnson to Ticket to Work and
Work Incentives Advisory Panel. Washington, D.C.: Fleishman-Hillard,
Inc.

Mank, D. & Revell, G. (2001). Systemic change for supported employment:
Old lessons and new possibilities. In: Wehman, P. [Supported employment
in business: Expanding the capacity of workers with
disabilities.]{.underline} St. Augustine, FL: Training Resource Network
Inc. Publishing.

Maximus (2003a). ENs Approved for Ticket To Work Program. Alexandria,
VA: author. Retrieved February 22, 2003 from
http://www.yourtickettowork.com/en_news

Maximus (2003b). Ticket to Work -- Employment Networks for Richmond, VA.
Alexandria, VA: author. Retrieved January 25, 2003 from
<http://www.yourtickettowork.com/endir?action=citystate&city_name=Richmond&state=VA&Find=Find>

Maximus (2003c). Ticket to Work -- Ticket Holders. Alexandria, VA:
author. Retrieved January 25, 2003 from
<http://www.yourtickettowork.com/th_faqs>

Mickey, M. (1999). CHIP outreach and enrollment: A view from the states.
Washington, D.C.: American :Public Human Services Association. Retrieved
January 25. 2003 from http://medicaid.aphsa.org/pubs/chip99.pdf

NAMI (2002). Working for wellness: Work Incentives Training Program.
Oklahoma City, OK: NANI Oklahoma.

Nightingale, D., Pindus, N., Trutko, & Egner, M. (2002). The
implementation of the Welfare to Work grants program. Washington, D.C.:
Urban Institute. Retrieved January 25, 2003 from
http://www.urban.org/Template.cfm?Section=ByAuthor&NavMenuID=63&template=/TaggedContent/ViewPublication.cfm&PublicationID=7838

O'Brien, D. (2002). \"Ticket to Work Basics.\" Presentation given at the
2002 National Workforce Inclusion Conference. Los Angeles.

Social Security Administration (October 16, 2002). Social Security
Announces New Initiatives to Promote Employment Opportunities for People
with Disabilities. Retrieved February 23, 2003 from
http://www.ssa.gov/enews/enewspress101602.htm

Social Security Administration (February, 2003). The Ticket to Work and
Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999: Outreach and Marketing, Federal
Partnerships, Public Education, and Training. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Social Security Administration (2003). Ticket Tracker. Retrieved
February 22, 2003 from
http://www.ssa.gov/work/Ticket/ticket_info.html#TicketTracker

Steinfeldt, T. (November 14, 2002). Job program aids disabled Tickets\'
help find jobs. [The Northern Virginia Journal]{.underline}.

Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Advisory Panel (November 12, 2003)
Comments made by Mary Satterfield. Official Transcript of Advisory Panel
Meeting.

Vermont Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (June 13, 2002). Letter of
agreement regarding the Social Security Administration Ticket to Work
Program between the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation and the
Vermont Association of Business, Industry, and Rehabilitation. Rutland,
VT: author.

Webb, S. (2002, September 26) Testimony before the subcommittee on
Social Security Of the House Committee on Ways and Means Hearing on
Fourth in a Series on Social Security Disability Programs\' Challenges
and Opportunities.

Wegener, V. (1999). Children\'s Health Insurance Program -- Outreach and
enrollment. [Welfare Information Network]{.underline}, 3(4). Retrieved
December 20, 2002 from <http://www.welfareinfo.org/chipissuenotes.htm>

Wehman, P. & Revell, G. (2003). Lessons learned from the provision and
funding of employment services for the MR/DD population: Implications
for assessing the adequacy of the SSA Ticket to Work. IN: Bell, S. &
Rupp, K. (Eds.) [Paying for Results in Vocational Rehabilitation: Will
Provider Incentives Work for Ticket to Work?]{.underline} Washington,
D.C.: The Urban Institute.

Wehman, P., Revell, G., & Kregel, J. (1998). Supported employment: A
decade of rapid growth and impact. [American
Rehabilitation]{.underline}. 24(1), 31-43.

[^1]: The authors gratefully acknowledge the input and editorial
    comments of Stephen Bell, Lucy Miller, and Brian McMahon on this
    paper.

[^2]: This case study is adapted from a November 14, 2002 article by Tom
    Steinfeldt with permission from the Northern Virginia Journal.

[^3]: As of February 22, 2003, the Maximus website reported that over
    750 ENs have been approved (Maximus, 2003a).

[^4]: We are indebted to Robin Russell for her assistance in this
    section.

[^5]: We are indebted to Dan O'Brien for his assistance in this section
    on marketing to beneficiaries.

[^6]: We are indebted to Cary Griffin for his assistance in this section
    on self-employment

[^7]: This information was derived from interviews and discussions with
    regional and area managers and other key staff at Manpower, Inc.