TASH Connections Volume 39 Issue 3
Letter from our President Dear TASH Members,
As The Beatles said in one of their songs, Money don’t get everything, its true...What it don’t get I can’t use! We all recognize the value of money, even if we don’t have much of it. One of the best known facts about people with intellectual or developmental disabilities is that their unemployment rate far exceeds the national average. What is less known, but understandable, is that they are disproportionately represented among those living in poverty. In other words, not only are they less likely to have a job, they are less likely to have any accumulated assets.
While many of us support their rights to a quality education, an inclusive life, and self-determination, what people with disabilities often lack, and what they likely could benefit a great deal from, is being able to build and control their financial assets. This why Individual Development Accounts (IDAs), which are discussed in the articles in this issue of Connections, are so important. If you are professionally or personally connected to a person with disabilities, of any age, you will want to read these articles carefully. The information they provide could change a life. IDAs offer a new tool in the never-ending campaign for equity and justice. Most importantly, they let people have dreams about what they would like in their lives, and give them a way for achieving the dreams. Yes, there are a number of things that money can’t buy, but, let’s face it, it gives those who have it a sense of control over their lives which is the purest form of self-determination.
I know you will find this issue of Connections informative, and I hope it will influence the actions of many people with disabilities and their families.
Sincerely, David L. Westling, President, TASH Board of Directors
Letter from our Executive Director
One Step Forward --- On February 12th, it became easier for some individuals with disabilities to build financial assets. On this day, President Obama made good on his promise to raise the minimum wage for Federal contract workers to $10.10 per hour. In an Executive Order, the President outlined the details, which are included in a Fact Sheet (view it here). He made history by including workers with disabilities – including those currently paid less than minimum wage! Although this action only effects service workers – those working in food service, janitorial, and grounds crews, for example – it is estimated that thousands of workers who would otherwise be paid an average of $2.50 will make real wages for the work they do, beginning January 1, 2015.
We applaud the President and the US Department and the US Department of Labor for taking this important step to chip away at an archaic and discriminatory practice. There are a few important things we can celebrate about the President’s action. For example:
• The President of the United States made it clear that workers with disabilities should be paid a livable wage for their work. This is an important “bully pulpit” statement. It’s also the first time any enforceable federal action contradicts 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act, which allows for sub-minimum wage payment to workers with disabilities.
• Some people with disabilities will actually benefit, making their chances for financial self- sufficiency much greater.
That said – there is so much more to do. Here’s why--
• The numbers of people benefiting from this action will be small. Many of the workers involved in service contracts are already making minimum wage or above. This action helps a tiny fraction of the estimated 420,000 people still subjected to “wages” less than minimum wage.
• It does nothing to mandate integrated work – many of the workers with disabilities in federal service contracts work in enclaves – and remain separated from the rest of the community.
• It does nothing to confront the prevailing belief that measuring “productivity” of workers against arbitrary standards is a real measure of their actual worth. Productivity measures will still play a role in determining an employee’s wage.
This is why H.R. 831, The Fair Wage for Workers with Disabilities Act of 2013, is so important. This bill calls for the phasing out of certificates that allow sub-minimum wage payment over a three year period. Sixty-five congressional representatives have co-sponsored the bill: find out if yours has at http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house- bill/831/cosponsors?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22The+Fair+Wage+for+Workers+with+Disabilities+ Act+of+2013%22%5D%7D. If not, please ask them to co-sponsor H.R. 831 by following the prompts at http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/.
TASH joined with the Collaboration to Promote Self Determination, the Autistic Self Advocacy Network and many other advocacy organizations to call on the President to include people with disabilities in his Executive Order. TASH’s Policy Statement on Subminimum Wage (2012) states:
While section 14(c) was intended to prevent the curtailment of opportunities for people with disabilities to work in the mainstream workforce, the program has largely become a tool for Medicaid-funded habilitation service providers to maintain artificial and segregated work environments which have proven ineffective in enabling individuals with disabilities to gain the competencies, skills and opportunities to transition to employment in the general workforce at competitive wages. These segregated environments are also in contradiction with the intent and spirit of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Supreme Court’s Olmstead decision. Other public funding streams and proven rehabilitation strategies now exist for enabling individuals with disabilities, who might otherwise be paid sub-minimum wages, to obtain and maintain employment in the general workforce. There is no longer a need, nor a justification for the continuation of section 14(c). Letter from our Guest Editor, Abby Cooper
Asset Development: The Need for Broader Thinking. We are a society that cares about money. Since the 1800’s when Horatio Alger sold his first rags to riches dime novel spinning the tale of the American Dream we brought into it. Anyone, regardless of their beginnings can, with hard work and good fortune, or, as Alger would say “pluck and luck” become wealthy. Even with today’s complex financial structure, the multiple and extensive changes in our economy, and the hardship many are experiencing, we still hold to the belief that with hard work and luck we will at least be financially comfortable. Yet for some this myth is just that: a myth. People live outside of the financial mainstream, worse yet we have created systems, policies and approaches that trap a portion of our population in poverty regardless of their hard work and luck. We are not outraged by the fact 28% of working age adults with disabilities are living in poverty (http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-239.pdf). Many are encouraged to accept low paying jobs at or even below minimum wage based on the assumption everyone starts somewhere and one day moves up the economic ladder. For many in the disabled community that day will never come without new approaches and assumptions.
Our approaches and thinking on obtaining living wages for individuals with complex needs have been, at best ineffective, and at worst, antiquated. Our field can no longer seek prosperity in the antiquated solutions of the past. We need to look beyond what we have already done: it is not just a matter of how we pay for services to expand individual employment but how that employment places a person on a pathway to financial stability. We all work for money: wages matter. Employment is not work without pay – employment is real work at real, livable wages. So while getting a job is the first step, sustaining and increasing income over time should be a goal established early on in the planning process with jobseekers with disabilities and their families. We need to strive for the best possible wage for individuals with disabilities, particularly when public dollars are part of the equation.
Does this sound counter to some of the concerns providers and families express about individuals with disabilities earning too much income and thus jeopardizing their Medicaid, SSI and other public benefits? Well, that’s because it is. According to the Aversion Theory, all people are more afraid of what they will lose then what they will gain. The perception that public benefits will be lost due to working becomes a major barrier to obtaining financial stability. The fear and risk connected to the impact of earnings on access to the long-term supports and services can be very real. That is why it is imperative that financial conversations are part of the entire planning process. Jobseekers with disabilities and their families need to think about what are the essential benefits. What are benefits they are willing to let go of now and over time. Financial planning and the implementation of specific asset building strategies, needs to be part of the conversation. We need to be concerned not just with the front-end service goals of attaining employment, but in the long-term goals of helping individuals achieve and sustain optimal economic advancement.
Giving individuals with disabilities more viable options to achieve and sustain integrated employment will require the incorporation of financial planning and asset building strategies as part of an individual planning process from youth forward. By infusing a more strategic focus on both long-term employment and asset development, individuals with disabilities will have a game plan in place that allows them to advance economically while still maintaining access to critical long-term supports and services. And there are strategies that can be deployed. For example, the asset development community has invested heavily in the establishment of Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) or matched savings accounts. These are accounts where for every dollar a person saves it is matched by one to eight dollars depending on the funding stream. The funding streams used to match the personal contributions of individuals are comprised of private and federal funds. There are also state and private match saving accounts in some states. The accounts are usually capped at $4,000. Unfortunately, very few workers with disabilities have yet to take advantage of this option.
What would happen if we took a facsimile of that idea and used it as a potential model to pay for follow- along services for individuals with disabilities once they attain integrated employment? Certainly long- term financing of follow-along services can be expensive, and often this reality is a reason state and local entities deny employment services to individuals with disabilities who do not have funding for long term services. In other words, a person may be able to work, but because the system supporting the individual cannot come up with the funds to pay for necessary follow-along services, the person is prevented from accessing employment supports and thus the chance to be part of the financial mainstream.
This is a real barrier to employment for individuals with disabilities that require long term supports and services. So, what if workers with disabilities could save a portion of their earnings and have it matched by the funder, or an employer to pay for long term supports. Across the country employer-supported IDAs have been established as part of benefits packets. Why not one for individuals with disabilities to pay for long term supports? Would this approach give workers with disabilities more control over their lives and their finances? The findings from the RSA Informed Choice projects from the 1990s demonstrate the effectiveness of individuals with disabilities having control over their service dollars. Data has shown that IDAs increase self-confidence, feelings of being in control, and involvement in the community.(1) This is just one small example of how we can begin to think bigger. This idea may or may not work but I know we need to bring new ideas to the table. The following articles provide additional ideas that should push our thinking forward.
1. (2001). Moore, A., Beverly, S., Schreiner, M., Sherraden, M., Lombe, M., Cho, E., Johnson, L. & Vonderlack, R. Saving, IDA programs, and effects of IDAs: A survey of participants. St. Louis: Center for Social Development, Washington University. http://csd.wustl.edu/Publications/Documents/95.SavingIDAProgramsAndEffectsOfIDAs.pdf
Articles from our Contributors
Changing the Expectations: Moving Beyond Employment to Financial Stability By Abby Cooper
We live in a country that values ownership and wealth. “The premise that we want to be a nation of owners is attractive and deeply rooted in the American psyche” (Brown, Kuttner, & Shapiro, 2005, p. 1). In his interviews with Bill Moyers, Joseph Campbell talked about looking at the physical structures a society builds to see what it values. Where as we once built cathedrals; high-rise banks now dominate the landscape of most cities. Money matters in our society.
Yet, millions of people with disabilities remain trapped in a life of poverty. A person with a disability is approximately three times more likely to live in poverty than a person without a disability (National Organization on Disability/Harris, 2004). This makes people with disabilities the largest segment of people living in poverty, more so than single parents or members of any particular racial/ethnic group. Relatively few people seem outraged by this reality, as if this is the inescapable reality of disability. Rarely do we consider how society’s assumptions, expectations, and disability policies may have contributed to this situation. The last thirty years employment policy has not resulted in individuals with disabilities being part of the financial mainstream, financially stable or, for that matter, gainfully employed. Data released in July 2011 by the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that only 32.8% of working-age people (ages 16 to 64) with disabilities are actually in the U.S. workforce. By comparison, the workforce participation rate for people without disabilities is 77.2%. Furthermore, the income of workers with disabilities is on average one third less than the income of their coworkers without disabilities (National Council on Disability, 2011).
As the recent financial crisis has reminded us all, achieving and maintaining financial stability is multifaceted and complex for anyone. Yet, employment is just one leg of the financial stability stool— important, but not the whole picture.. The assumption that financial security comes simply from having a job is naive. Individuals with disabilities face formative challenges to achieving financial stability from benefit systems that are complex, often intimidating, and sometimes riddled with misinformation.
For individuals with disabilities to become a part of the financial mainstream, disability policy makers need to conceptualize employment as much more than simply whether or not someone is working. For example, many people with significant disability who have jobs work 12 hours or less per week; they have a job, but remain poor and socially excluded. Indeed, social exclusion is an element of poverty we frequently overlook. As we look at full integration of individuals with disabilities, we must also address the impact lack of money has on social exclusion. In Ireland, poverty is defined in the following way: “People are living in poverty if their income and resources (material, cultural and social) are so inadequate as to preclude them from having a standard of living which is regarded as acceptable by Irish society generally. As a result of inadequate income and resources people may be excluded and marginalized from participating in activities which are considered the norm for other people in society” (Department of Social Protection, 2012).
Having a job does not necessary translate to having a bank account, a savings account, or financial stability. The disability field can learn from the asset-building community. Over the last decade, the asset-building community has focused on developing different approaches and strategies’ for individuals living in poverty to develop saving accounts, be financially literate, and acquire assets. There is a need for new polices and strategies that serve to diminish the connection between poverty and disabilities. Adopting this commitment will require the field to examine carefully its assumptions. Few people with or without a disability obtain employment unless someone believes that person can work and instills that expectations in the person. The same is very true of taking part in the financial mainstream. Few people become “banked,” take out loans, or own assets if they never receive the message that they can be part of the economic mainstream. Rarely do case managers, teachers, parents, and other professionals send the message that everyone should be part of the financial mainstream. On the contrary, we send the exact opposite message to people with significant disabilities. If we believe a person will never be financially independent, our efforts tend to focus on protecting his or her benefits and keeping work hours low. It would be much more beneficial to ask: How can we use your benefits as an asset-building tool to put you in a better financial place? What are the benefits that are essential to you and what can be let go of in the future?
Rarely within the Employment First movement is there conversation about a living wage. Even with this exciting initiative, we remain stuck in the old paradigm that we should be satisfied with helping people find any job, rather than finding a job that actually builds financial stability. If the focus on living wages was part of the conversation, the arguments currently occurring around subminimum wages would go out the window. Far too few conversations focus on how much people with significant disabilities want to earn, what they want to buy with their earnings, what they might want to save for, who they would like to assist them, or what aspects of their spending they should control. And far too rarely is the wage considered a condition of employment. Job developers must be willing to negotiate starting salary and hours up rather than down.
It is also important to help individuals with disabilities and their families think through which benefits are essential, which benefits are worth letting go, and the point at which such a transition might occur. Benefit systems can be illogical and incredibly complex; many individuals and their families will decide that the system is just not worth the trouble to navigate without these important conversations. “Loss Aversion Theory” posits that individuals naturally prefer avoiding losses to acquiring gains. In other words, if you obtain a job for $2,000 a month but lose your cash benefit from SSI, you are more concerned about losing your benefits then increasing your income.
In addition to explaining how a person will be better off using work incentives, we need to be talking about the risk and uncertainty from letting go of benefits versus the payoff. A risk is something someone can gauge or has a sense of the possible outcomes based on past experience and knowledge. When a risk is taken, the risk taker has a reasonable idea of the expected outcome. Uncertainty, however, means one is unclear what will happen and has no way to project possible outcomes. There are many individuals who are afraid to take jobs due to the impact on their benefits. If people live in a place of uncertainty, they are afraid of losing what they have, unsure whether their job will really last, and have trouble envisioning themselves as financially stable. Even with accurate information, it is understandable why some believe it safer not to work and remain poor.
Teachers, case managers, and professionals should have conversations early on with young people (and their families) about the life they want, how service providers can best assist them in achieving this life, and the role money will play in supporting them. Planning is incomplete (and ineffective) if it does not include conversations about financial stability. Financial stability will remain a foreign, unobtainable concept without these conversations and employment will stay a remote possibility.
As a field, we need to re-frame public resources and benefits as asset building tools to establish financial stability for individuals with disabilities. This may require different conversations and different ways of thinking. Until recently, the disability system was structured to “take care” of people, not to empower them. But there is no way to effectively talk about money without empowerment.
In the following sections, I offer recommendations for making discussion of financial stability part of the conversations we have with people with disabilities and their families.
Implications for Families and Services The dreams of young people begin in the home. The expectations, vision, and values parents hold for a family member with or without a disability lay part of the foundation for that person's future success and self-image. Money is one piece of that picture. Amidst all of the things families of children with significant disabilities must attend to and advocate for, it is easy to overlook the fact that money and financial planning are parts of the equation. Findings in the field of Behavioral Economics suggest people tend to have unrealistic optimism. This unrealistic optimism demonstrates itself in faulty thinking— people assuming they will do better than they actually do and most problems happen to others. As a person with a disability or a parent of an individual with a significant disability, it is easy to see how this concept can play into limited planning or conversations around money. Families need help from the variety of systems they encounter. Every system should be asking how their services can help a particular individual to move further along on the pathway to financial stability.
Transition Education Including Financial Literacy How might financial literacy be addressed within a student’s individualized education program (IEP)? In most schools, these discussions have not occurred. At least 30 states have some requirement for financial literacy curricula in high schools, but in most cases students receiving special education are not accessing these classes. The IEP could be a great tool to help students and their families start planning around a financial future.
The planning process could address questions such as: What type of wage does the student needs to earn? What will that wage buy? What work incentives should be implemented? Will an account be established with a credit union or bank? Many young people with significant disabilities have limited to no control over their money. Creating opportunities while people are young to learn about and take charge of their financial situation can help build a strong foundation for the future. Even if a student struggles to grasp the concept of handling money, they can still learn that money helps them get the things they want. More students with disabilities receive travel training then receive basic financial information about banking, taxes, credit, or the limited purchasing power of minimum wage. When they do receive financial training, frequently is limited to budgeting. Budgeting is certainly a valuable skill, but it is like teaching students about dieting before you teach them to cook.
Students and their families could create a financial plan as a living document students leave school with. For example, the plan could address the work incentives that will be utilized, when and where the student will open a bank account, how to find financial literacy tools online or elsewhere in the community, how to use the Earned Income Tax Credit, and where to access community-based asset building resources.
Vocational Rehabilitation As the largest provider of employment services to people with disabilities, Vocational Rehabilitation has the opportunity to lay the foundation for financial stability for millions of individuals with disabilities. If Vocational Rehabilitation is to be framed as an avenue for promoting financial stability, then additional issues need to be considered during the rehabilitation process. Much has been said in the field about the importance of customizing a job for people with significant disabilities. Rarely are there conversations about the importance of understanding the wages a person needs to ensure his or her financial stability when customizing jobs. Many tools have been developed over the years to help individuals with significant disabilities be successful in competitive employment from (e.g., systemic instruction, co-worker supports, using iPads for instruction or cueing, setting smart phones for when a person should return from break or do a certain task). Where are the tools to help with money?
Vocational Rehabilitation counselors should consider wages and financial supports when exploring job possibilities. At the very least, these counselors need to know:
• The amount of money clients need to be financially stable and how their clients define financial stability (now and in the future);
• How to help clients strategically use their public benefits;
• The financial goals of their clients and how those goals might be addressed within a vocational plan;
• How to contract with financial literacy providers, credit repair agencies, and community providers who are willing to negotiate on the client’s behalf for higher wages.
Prior to closing cases, vocational rehabilitation counselors also need reflect on the following questions:
• Is the client employed at wages that at least meet his or her expenses?
• What steps can a client who is in financial trouble take to get help?
• Does the client (or his or her supports) know how to report earned income to SSA?
• Does the client know how to apply for Earned Income Tax credit?
• Does he or she have a bank account?
• Does the client know who in the community can assist with budgeting, financial literacy, asset-building strategies such as Individual Savings Accounts, low interest loans, and credit repair? These simple steps can go a long way in putting a person on the pathway to financial stability. Several state Vocational Rehabilitation programs across the country are currently trying to figure out how to include financial stability into their services. States are at an early stage in their implementation, but at least the conversations have started. For example, Kentucky hosted an asset-building summit for disability community and others in the state. The purpose of the summit was to bring decision makers together to collectively address the issue of disability and poverty.
Emerging Possibilities There are exciting shifts occurring that are reshaping possibilities for individuals with disabilities. One of these developments is proposed legislation called Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE; http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s1872/show). The creation of ABLE began five years ago in an effort to address two major factors impacting a person’s ability to be financial stable: (a) the high cost of living with a disability and (b) the impact of resource limits associated with Social Security Supplemental Income (SSI) and Medicaid. Some individuals with disabilities have a special needs trust, but for most individuals this is not a possibility. ABLE is structured as open avenue for anyone with a disability who meets the eligibility requirements of SSI or Social Security Disability Insurance and is under 65. It is a tax- free account allowing persons to maintain eligibility for SSI and Medicaid. ABLE falls within Section 529 of the IRS code and follows all the requirements of a traditional 529 account. Many families have 529 accounts to save for higher education for children. Like these higher education accounts, ABLE is intended to be easy to open and portable. Residents in one state can open it in another state or take ABLE along to another state.
A person with a disability can open or contribute to his or her own ABLE account, and claim a tax deduction for contributions of up to $2,000. Up to $100,000 can be saved before SSI benefits are placed in suspension. Once the account drops below $100,000, SSI resumes. Over the lifetime of the account, $500,000 can be saved. In 32 states, Medicaid will not be impacted based on the amount in the ABLE account under $100,000. In the 209b states where Medicaid is not tied to SSI, more restrictive criteria exists that may have an impact on Medicaid. Currently, lobbyists are working with lawmakers to ensure individuals in 209b states can have ABLE accounts without impacting Medicaid.
Accounts can be used for a wide variety of things, including education (e.g., tuition), housing, transportation, employment support, health and wellness, rehabilitation services, life necessities, assistive technology and personal support, miscellaneous expenses, financial management, legal fees, and expenses for oversight monitoring or funerals. ABLE has not been signed into law yet, but it signals a watershed moment whether or not it passes. ABLE signifies that the field is ready to consider new approaches to address the growing problem of people with disabilities being trapped in poverty. ABLE also recognizes that having a venue to save needs to be a part of the equation.
Conclusion Slowly, policy makers are realizing asset development and financial stability should be connected and need to be part of the conversation around disability services. Our narrow focus on employment outcomes alone has not been resulted in what is needed, too many individuals live in poverty. As advocates, parents, professionals, and people with disabilities, we need to foster the expectation that individuals with disabilities are part of the financial mainstream and that working is only part of the equation. Policy makers and elected officials should embed asset development as a service component. It should be in the Rehabilitation Act, Workforce Investment Act, Medicaid Services, Social Security Administration, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service. If the unlinking of poverty and disability is going to occur. Financial stability should be a fundamental focus of disability service delivery. This will require creating new tools, strategies, counseling approaches, and other options. It also demands new and different partnerships and relationships. How do we establish relationship with banks and the asset- building coalitions in our community so that they are willing to think about additional banking tools for persons with significant disabilities? Many states have asset-building coalitions that work on policies and strategies to assist individuals to escape poverty. Sadly, disability policy makers, service providers, persons with disabilities, and families are not at the table. For example, programs like Bank On (http://joinbankon.org) exist in many communities with the purpose of improving the financial futures of the unbanked but the disability community has rarely been part of this effort. The disability community needs to change that and be at the table when poverty is being addressed and strategies implemented.
Overview of the Issue The collection of articles in this issue of TASH Connections highlights different strategies that have been successful in assisting individuals with disabilities to obtain financial stability. Many of the programs have used the concept of Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) or low interest loans for assistive technology. IDAs are matched saving accounts where the amount of income an individual saves is matched. The match can be anywhere from $1-$8 depending on the program. IDAs are usually capped at $4,000. As you will read, some programs were supported with federal funding from Assets with Independence (AFI), some had a combination of both state and federal funding, and one was funded by the Medicare Infrastructure Grants.
If an IDA is a federally funded program, individuals on Social Security Supplemental income receive a waiver so the money saved is not counted as a resource. IDA programs that are private or state funded do not have the same protection. Private or state-funded programs must ensure the person cannot access the account; when the item they are saving for is purchased, the check goes directly to the vendor. If these conditions are followed, then the money in the IDA does not count as resource. All of the IDA programs described in this issue provided financially literacy training and support. Each program also considered how the basic concept of match savings accounts, IDAs, needed to be tweaked to meet the needs of individuals with disabilities. IDAs came out of the poverty moment based on the conviction that to leave poverty, people needed assets. Over the last fifteen years, this concept has expanded and grown. The articles that follow demonstrate an array of approaches to increase financial stability for individuals with disabilities.
About the Author Abby Cooper’s career has focused on employment and financial stability for individuals with disabilities. She provided Technical Assistance to AFI on asset development for individuals with disabilities to Washington, Wisconsin, Connecticut, and Oregon. Currently, she works with eight states on the issue of financial stability for individuals with disabilities. References Brown, J. L., Kuttner, R., & Shapiro, T. M. (2005). Building a real “ownership society.” New York, NY: The Century Foundation Press.
Department of Social Protection. (2012). What is poverty? Dublin, Ireland: Author. Retrieved from http://www.socialinclusion.ie/poverty.html#whatis
National Organization on Disability/Harris. (2004). National Organization on Disability/Harris survey of Americans with disabilities. Washington, DC: Authors.
National Council on Disability. (2011). National disability policy: A progress report (October 2011). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.ncd.gov/progress_reports/Oct312011
Asset Development by People with Disabilities: An Innovative Approach By Catherine A. Anderson, Ellie C. Hartman, Amber Miller, Amy Thomson, & Abigail Cooper
Individuals with disabilities are less likely to be employed and are more likely to live in poverty than any other demographic group (Assets for Independence Resource Center, 2009). Despite the fact that almost two thirds of adults living in long-term poverty have disabilities, poverty and disability have historically been treated as separate issues, addressed by separate advocacy groups and separate government programs. However, the reality is that poverty and disability interact with one another to perpetuate inequalities across systems (Pokempner & Roberts, 2001).
Our pilot program in Wisconsin was designed as a collaborative effort between disability and employment researchers through the University of Wisconsin-Stout Vocational Rehabilitation Institute (SVRI) and community-based economic development experts at the Wisconsin Women’s Business Initiative Corporation (WWBIC). Expert consultation was provided through the Lewin Group. WWBIC is an economic development organization located in a historically low-income area of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. As a grantee under the Assets for Independence Act, WWBIC has administered matched savings accounts, referred to as Individual Development Accounts (IDAs), for several years. SVRI has been a long-standing leader in developing and providing employment services such as work incentives, benefits counseling, job placement, evaluation, and assistive technology to individuals with disabilities. Additionally, conducting community-based participatory research with consumers and other key stakeholders has also been central to the mission and vision of enhancing employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
WWBIC recognized that although interest in IDAs by individuals with disabilities existed, enrollment of people with disabilities in their program remained low. Rather than continue to address disability and poverty as separate issues, the team decided to combine efforts to design and test an approach bringing together resources and expertise from both fields. The purpose of our pilot project was to learn whether financial education and alternative matched savings options enhanced the financial self-efficacy (i.e. sense of control) of lower-income individuals with disabilities over their spending and savings habits. Employment and Economic Development Programs for People with Disabilities
Vocational Rehabilitation Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) is the largest public program designed specifically to help adults with disabilities enter or re-enter the workforce. VR is a national state-federal program providing medical, therapeutic, counseling, education, training, work-related placement assistance, and other necessary services to assist individuals with disabilities to prepare for, obtain, and maintain competitive employment (Hayward & Schmidt-Davis, 2003). The overarching philosophy highlighted in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended, is to enhance employment outcomes for people with disabilities in order to maximize independence and community participation.
Eligibility for VR services requires a person to have a work-limiting disability and show that he or she will be employable after receiving services. Those eligible for services work with a VR counselor to establish a vocational goal and develop a service plan to achieve that goal. To support this planning process, participants may undergo further assessments (e.g., benefits counseling, vocational evaluation) and detail their service needs in an Individualized Plan for Employment (Wittenburg & Favreault, 2003).
A variety of asset-development strategies and tools can be used in concert with employment to help people with disabilities move from poverty to self-sufficiency and independence. Financial literacy and asset development strategies such as educational courses, credit repair, and matched savings accounts may be addressed if a VR consumer is pursuing self-employment, but are otherwise not generally included in the plan.
Assets for Independence The Assets for Independence (AFI) program provides asset development opportunities to low-income individuals and families through the use of matched savings accounts called Individual Development Accounts (IDAs). IDA savings can be used for three purposes: (1) to purchase a home, (2) to start a business, or (3) to fund post-secondary education. IDA participants must also attend financial education classes. AFI grantees, typically community-based organizations, offer “match rates” on IDA savings ranging from $1 to $8 for each $1 saved; up to $2,000 in savings per participant are allowed.
Overall, people with disabilities continue to be underrepresented among AFI participants. A pilot study by Lombe, Huang, Putnam, and Cooney (2010) found that although people with disabilities with low incomes can save in IDA accounts, they generally save less and are less likely to participate in the financial education classes than participants without disabilities. This information is consistent with WWBIC’s observations and suggests that the “traditional” federal IDA program may not fully meet the needs of individuals with disabilities and more flexible approaches are needed.
Work Incentives Benefits Counseling Work incentives benefits counseling is a service designed to provide information regarding benefits, earnings, and provisions within public benefit programs (most frequently the Social Security Administration) for people with disabilities to make informed choices about work. Research demonstrates that individuals with disabilities who receive work incentives benefits counseling earn more than those who do not receive the service (Delin, Hartman, & Sell, 2012; Tremblay et al., 2004). A common misconception is that retaining resources automatically results in a loss or reduction of benefits, particularly Social Security benefits (Assets for Independence Resource Center, 2010). Many people with disabilities are unaware that federal IDAs are excluded from eligibility determinations of means-tested programs, and many professionals working in these programs do not understand the interplay between IDA funds and eligibility (Assets for Independence Resource Center, 2009). Work incentive benefits specialists are a national cadre of skilled professionals with an understanding of the complex eligibility and work incentive information across most publicly funded programs. They can effectively serve as interpreters in gathering and translating complex program information so individuals with disabilities can make informed decisions as they enter or re-enter the workforce.
Work incentives benefits specialists, along with VR counselors and AFI grantees, can help increase people with disabilities’ chances for working and retaining access to necessary benefits by helping participants fully utilize work incentives. Researchers have recommended that an experienced benefits/work incentives counselor should work collaboratively with asset development program providers (Davies & Malloy, 2007).
The Need for Alternative Approaches to Asset Development Just as disability issues can be unique and complex, individual savings and asset-accumulation goals can also vary from one person to the next. Several studies have noted why the “traditional” IDA program may not be as flexible as needed to engage participants with disabilities (Cook, Burke-Miller, Jonikas, & Swarbrick, 2010; Edwards & Bailey, 2006; Leydorf & Kaplan, 2001; Soffer, McDonald, & Blank, 2010). Typical IDA timeframes may be too restrictive and although the three allowable savings goals of home ownership, education, and business development are important, they do not adequately allow for disability-specific accommodations that enhance accessibility and community or workplace participation. While recommendations have been made to revise existing IDA requirements to allow saving toward additional asset goals (e.g., accessible or customized vehicles, home modifications, assistive technology, first month’s rent for students transitioning from school to work, computers, other adaptive equipment), these recommendations have yet to be tested and implemented on a broad scale (Edwards & Bailey, 2006; Hartnett, Mendelsohn, & Morris, 2008; Soffer, McDonald, & Blank, 2010).
Pilot Project Design The pilot team met on a regular basis for approximately one year to thoughtfully develop the initial model. Essential elements of the pilot design included: (a) participants had disabilities according to the Americans with Disabilities Act definition, (b) WWBIC provided the “intervention” which included financial literacy courses and access to enhanced savings accounts that provided match based on participant goals, (c) an expanded definition of allowable savings goals with non-federal Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) to see if the additional flexibility better served the needs of individuals with disabilities, and (d) access to work incentives benefits counseling as needed. Technical assistance through the Lewin Group helped the partners keep on track and move forward with the project through implementation.
Participants were randomly assigned to two groups. The first group had access to financial literacy courses through WWBIC, work incentives benefits counseling, and traditional savings accounts with no match provided. The second group also had access to financial literacy courses through WWBIC and work incentives benefits counseling, but instead of a traditional savings account, they were provided access to “enhanced matched savings accounts” which provided a match of up to $8 for every $1 saved by the participant to expedite the path to success. Participants set savings goals for specific purchases to support employment efforts including assistive technology, adaptive equipment, housing expenses, transportation, a computer, debt reduction and credit repair, micro-enterprise development (i.e., self- employment), or personal assistance services in the workplace. Participants were not required to deposit earned income only in their savings accounts in order to qualify for the match. A concern with traditional federal IDAs is that deposits must come from earned income only, which puts individuals with disabilities who are trying to return to the workforce and work out of poverty at a distinct disadvantage (Leydorf & Kaplan, 2001).
Although VR provides valuable services for individuals with disabilities who want to work, participation with VR was not required to participate in this pilot study. Rather than recruiting through disability programs such as VR, the partners opted to recruit through less-traditional venues including the public housing authority. The intent was not to exclude those who might already be working with VR but rather to establish a sample of participants not necessarily directly connected with traditional disability services.
An initial focus group was conducted July 2011 and a follow-up focus group was held in June 2012. Semi- structured, open-ended questions were used to explore the experiences and perspectives of participants. Immediately following the initial focus group, a credit union representative was present on site to open participant savings accounts and the pilot made an initial deposit of $25 in each account to thank individuals for participating and to activate the accounts. Participants in both groups were also asked to complete a pre- and post-survey indicating their financial literacy knowledge. During the twelve month timeframe, participants had access to financial courses through WWBIC and a team member met with participants individually, held monthly meetings where participants shared information and support, and provided critical advocacy and encouragement for several individuals who needed assistance in communicating with other professionals such as VR counselors and bank staff.
Participant Experiences Of the eight original participants who started in the group with access to the “enhanced matched savings accounts”, six successfully met their savings goal during the pilot. Interestingly, participants did not fully access the work incentives benefits counseling services available throughout the course of the pilot independently. However, participants in both groups actively asked questions of the work incentives benefits specialist present at each of the focus group sessions. This indicates an interest in the information and service, but further research may be needed to identify how and when delivery is most effective within the context of these services.
Bradley is a young man in his early twenties who started the pilot in 2011 with the goal of purchasing a car. He was able to save and meet his financial goal within six months, using the funds to get his driver’s license back, pay for 6 months of car insurance, and purchase hand controls for his car. He worked closely with the WWBIC team member who developed an opportunity with the local neighborhood center for Bradley to volunteer 1-2 days a week and start developing key employment skills. He will be starting coursework in the Paralegal program at Milwaukee Area Technical College this fall thanks to support from his VR counselor. In addition to meeting his initial savings goal, experiencing success, and purchasing his asset, he created a long-term savings and spending plan that will serve him well into the future.
Sonya, a current Housing Authority City of Milwaukee resident, started the pilot program in July 2011. Her chosen asset was a vehicle so she could find employment and also travel to and from college. With her funds she was able to re-apply for her driver’s license, pay for six months of car insurance, pay down debt, and purchase a computer so she can do homework anytime she needs to. Sonya has participated in all Budgeting classes that are mandatory for the program and an inspiration to the other clients who are in the program
Participant Reflections Participants provided thoughtful, honest responses during the focus groups. We analyzed their input and share the following themes:
Empowerment and pride. Participants who saved were proud about developing strategies to support movement toward long-term saving independence by reducing expenses (e.g., cable bill, cell phone fees), establishing relationships with financial institutions such as banks or credit unions, and developing and using budgeting skills. Participants also expressed feeling empowered to make the behavioral changes necessary for improving their financial health. The following quotes reflect this theme:
• “It really brought me from nothing to something.”
• “This program has changed my life. My goal is to find a job in the next three months! I don’t have to rely on the bus to take me to college and the computer allows me to apply for jobs at home and not relying on the library and their business hours. I truly am blessed.”
• “This program started me down a successful path of debt reduction AND saving. Thank you!”
• “My confidence has grown considerably.”
• “I do feel because of this program it’s made me look at myself and my spending habits and my finances more closely, and realize that I’ve got more control over them than I might have thought. While I haven’t changed some of the behaviors that I want to yet, I’ve learned to at least be more aware of them and recognizing them is the first step to changing them.”
• “One thing I learned, I used to not be able to really save money. I would spend it all on just dumb miscellaneous stuff, but now I’m able to [save]. I always had to give it to somebody to hold for me, but now I’m able to really keep it and just not spend it all.”
Teaching and future orientation. Participants specifically noted wanting to teach what they learned about budgeting, saving, and spending wisely, to children, grandchildren, siblings, nieces and nephews. Contemplation about what they want in place in their lives as well as the legacy of increased financial knowledge, independence and control, particularly older participants, want to leave to behind. For example, participants noted:
• “You got to plan for not just your future but also the future of the other people that are depending upon you.”
• “I want to give him [nephew] a better future. I want him to do better than I did, so I focus on that.”
Misinformation and misunderstanding. People had pieces of information concerning Social Security benefits, but there still appeared to be a considerable amount of misinformation and confusion (e.g., asset limits, work incentives, child support).
• “One thing about being on disability is there’s a lot of I can’t do this, I can’t do that, so the attitude is I’m just not going to do anything.”
Banks and credit cards. Initially, participants expressed a distinct lack of trust due to previous negative experiences with banks resulting in many disengaging completely from a formal financial institution (i.e., becoming “unbanked”). Through the course of the pilot, participants who actively attended financial literacy courses and worked with the WWBIC team member, noted that their experience with banks and credit unions changed in a positive way and they developed a better understanding of how banks work and the rights and responsibilities involved in keeping an account. They also noted improved understanding about the impact of credit cards and the importance of developing strategies to control credit card use.
• “They’re a business like anybody else, and you can shop around and find the ones that will be good to you and sometimes you have to look a little harder than others, but I feel power with the knowledge that I have about working with them and making them a partner as opposed to this big thing I have to fight against.”
• “I had negative problems with banks in the past, but I’m able to more confidently speak with them now.”
Important for youth. Participants emphasized the urgency in offering financial literacy and asset development information to youth with and without disabilities. Providing information and applied learning opportunities early was considered to be critical in establishing healthy spending and saving habits for adulthood.
• “I would try to make it available for high school kids. They should have this-then all their life they wouldn’t have to, you know, learn the hard way. I wish I knew this before I ever left high school.”
Financial coaching and mentors: Participants said it was important to have an advocate or coach in place to keep motivated and stay on track with a savings plan and the financial coaching and support provided by the AFI site was considered invaluable. They suggested ideas for expanding the model such as developing a peer support and mentoring approach to work with other adults as well as mentor youth in transition and several offered to volunteer as mentors, specifically with youth.
• “It’s important to let people know your success story, how you’re down and out and basically, it brought you up, brought you back to the top, you know. That’s what it did for me-it really brought me from nothing to something.”
Need for interagency collaboration. Coordinating services and resources across different “systems” can be confusing, time-consuming, and frustrating for individuals with disabilities. Although most participants had VR counselors, none had initially been referred to this service by VR. Participants noted a specific need for VR counselors to increase their awareness of asset development/financial literacy resources in the community and to partner with these entities. The WWBIC team member took an active role in reaching out and communicating with VR to assist participants in troubleshooting specific aspects of their employment plans resulting in a smoother process for participants. By the end of the pilot, several VR counselors had contacted the WWBIC team member to request financial literacy and asset development services for additional consumers.
• “I learned more about what’s available-I had no idea that service was out there.”
Conclusion Our pilot project provided preliminary insight into the experience of individuals with disabilities and asset development strategies. The findings support the broader national discussion regarding the need for more flexible IDA savings goals by individuals with disabilities. Additionally, considerable misinformation and confusion about benefits, employment, and savings still exist and individuals who could benefit from work incentives benefits counseling, but are not connected with the disability and employment service system, are unlikely to access this service. It is important to provide financial education and applied experiences to youth with disabilities and establish this foundation early to improve employment and financial outcomes and success in adulthood. Financial coaches and mentors are a vital support in building financial stability. They can assist in improving communication and collaboration between disability and economic development professionals, which is necessary for improving economic outcomes for individuals with disabilities across systems.
About the Authors Catherine Anderson, MS, CRC, is the Associate Director of the University of Wisconsin-Stout Vocational Rehabilitation Institute (SVRI). Her current work involves research on work incentives benefits counseling, asset development strategies for individuals with disabilities, knowledge translation, and evidence-based practice in rehabilitation counseling.
Ellie Hartman, PhD, is a Senior Scientist with the University of Wisconsin-Stout Vocational Rehabilitation Institute (SVRI). Her research involves work incentives benefits counseling, asset development strategies, cross-agency systems change specific to employment of individuals with significant disabilities, and employment of Transition-age students. Amber Miller, MBA, MHEA, is the Project Director at Wisconsin Women’s Business Initiative Corporation (WWBIC) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. WWBIC promotes economic development through asset building financial awareness education programming, with an emphasis on women, people of color, and people of lower wealth and incomes.
Amy Thomson, MS, CRC, is an Employment Policy Analyst with the University of Wisconsin-Stout Vocational Rehabilitation Institute. Amy is an experienced work incentives benefits specialist and has worked as a practitioner, instructor, and policy expert in this area.
Abigail Cooper has extensive knowledge and experience with the state-federal vocational rehabilitation program and design and development of innovative employment models for people with disabilities. Abby was instrumental in establishing non-federal Individual Development Accounts (IDA) in Washington State and currently works as a national consultant on policies and issues that support individuals with disabilities enhance their economic self-sufficiency.
References Assets for Independence Resource Center. (2009). Understanding asset development for individuals with disabilities. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.idaresources.org/page?pageid=a047000000ApiTL
Assets for Independence Resource Center. (2010). What Assets for Independence (AFI) grantees need to know about people with disabilities and work. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.idaresources.org/page?pageid=a047000000AsidU
Cook, J., Burke-Miller, J., Jonikas, J., & Swarbrick, M. (2010). Asset development for people with psychiatric disabilities: The essential role of financial security in recovery. Retrieved from http://www.cmhsrp.uic.edu/download/NRTC4.IDA%20Project%20Report.10.25.10.pdf
Davies, T., & Malloy, J. (2007). Asset development for people with disabilities: A conceptual framework. Retrieved from http://www.nchsd.org/libraryfiles/AssetDevelopment/Asset%20Development%20Paper%20July07.pdf
Delin, B. S., Hartman, E. C., & Sell, C. W (2012). The impact of work incentive benefits counseling on employment outcomes: Evidence from two return-to-work demonstrations. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 36, 97-107.
Edwards, K., & Bailey, J. (2006). State-level individual development account (IDA) policy: Opportunities and challenges for rural America. St. Louis, MO: Center for Social Development. Retrieved from http://www.usc.edu/dept/chepa/IDApays/publications/123.pdf
Hartnett, J. T., Mendelsohn, S., & Morris, M. (2008). Disability and economic inclusion: Democratic principles and promises. In Building a better economic future: A progress report for individuals with disabilities & their families in America (pp. 13-28). Manchester, NH: Community Economic Development Press. Retrieved from http://www.realeconomicimpact.org/CompleteDocsListing.aspx?Cid=4 Hayward, B. J., & Schmidt-Davis, H. (2003). How consumer characteristics affect access to, receipt of, and outcomes of VR services (Final Report 1). Retrieved from U.S. Department of Education website: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/leg/rehab/eval-studies.html#vr
Leydorf, D., & Kaplan, D. (2001). Use of Individual Development Accounts by people with disabilities: Barriers and solutions. Oakland, CA: World Institute on Disability. Retrieved at http://www.wid.org/publications/use-of-individual-development-accounts-by-people-with-disabilities- barriers-and-solutions
Lombe, M., Huang, J., Putnam, M., & Cooney, K. (2010). Exploring saving performance in an IDA for people with disabilities: Some preliminary findings. Social Work Research, 24, 83-93.
Pokempner, J., & Roberts, D.E. (2001). Poverty, welfare reform, and the meaning of disability. Ohio State Law Journal, 62, 1-23.
Soffer, M., McDonald, K. E., & Blanck, P. (2010). Poverty among adults with disabilities: Barriers to promoting asset accumulation in individual development accounts. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46, 376-385. doi: 10.1007/s10464-010-9355-4
Tremblay, T., Xie, H., Smith, J., & Drake, R. (2004). The impact of specialized benefits counseling services on Social Security Administration disability beneficiaries in Vermont. Journal of Rehabilitation 70(2), 5– 11.
Wittenburg, D., & Favreault, M. (2003). Safety net or tangled web? An overview of programs and services for adults with disabilities. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
Individual Development Accounts: A Strategy to Build Assets By Michael Callahan
People with disabilities and their families have traditionally faced a Faustian Choice—accept federal SSI/Medicaid benefits and live a life of poverty or reject these benefits and roll the dice on attaining a working life that allows for access to the American Dream of having an income and assets necessary for a middle-class lifestyle. This has been referred to as the “benefits trap.” And even when individuals with significant disabilities opt to take the risk to become employed, they often choose hours of work that result in pay levels that ultimately do not put at risk their benefits. Thus, they remain in poverty. In the past, Congress passed legislation encouraging recipients of federal benefits to work themselves off of those benefits and into a life (theoretically at least) of financial stability through Ticket to Work, PASS plans, and IWREs. However, these efforts share one common characteristic—they have not worked to any significant degree. The vast majority of people with disabilities have been reluctant to give up their health care and cash payments through SSI. To be fair, the Social Security Administration has made significant strides in the past decade to assure recipients they can work and maintain their benefits, though at a level of employment that will keep workers below the poverty line.
Beyond the ineffectiveness of these well-intentioned strategies, they only focus on the issue of earned income (i.e., pay). The trap individuals receiving benefits find themselves in involves both income and assets. Up to now, there have been few efforts to change the reality associated with the amount of assets a recipient of SSI can amass. According to SSA’s 2012 Red Book, the resource (asset) limit for an individual is $2.000. In other words, even if an individual remains eligible for Medicaid and SSI by balancing their income level (which is legal) so as not to reduce SSI payments to zero, they may only amass a total of $2,000 of resources such as a home, stocks, savings, and other assets. Historically, organizations such as TASH have focused on increasing access to employment for persons with significant disabilities and assisting individuals and families to maintain their Medicaid health insurance. However, the past five years have brought about increasing scrutiny on the asset side of the benefits trap.
While there are a number of ways to build assets in our society, saving has been the most stable and traditional approach. Although, saving is accessible to all persons, home ownership requires both a certain level of income and access to assets equal to a percentage of the cost of a home for a down payment. Investing in stocks requires income, information, and the acceptance of risk. Retirement accounts—either from one’s employer or personal (i.e., 401k)—require a person to have a job with an employer that offers such programs to its employees. Saving requires only that an individual set aside any portion of their income on a regular basis. At the time of this article, personal saving has the downside of a low return based on historically low rates paid to investors. But in a time of stock market uncertainty and the bursting of the housing bubble, saving remains a mainstay strategy for building assets, especially for individuals with significant disabilities with limited income.
Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) Of course, people with disabilities are not the only people who lack assets. Michael Sherraden (1991), a professor at Washington University in St. Louis, conceived the idea of establishing matched savings accounts to encourage the habit of savings for the working poor. People who have traditionally been referred to as the “working poor” are people who are employed at the entry level of the job market with low wages, spotty access to health care benefits, little savings, low rates of home ownership and, thus, few assets. This group shares many characteristics in common with people with disabilities. Sherraden and his colleagues at the Center for Social Development suggested that a way to encourage savings and develop assets for this group would be through the idea of matched savings accounts. This would give the working poor access to benefits similar to those that workers in the middle class generally receive from their employers (i.e., a retirement plan that employers match). Research conducted on pilot initiatives during the 1990’s resulted in IDAs being included in our country’s major legislation on welfare reform (i.e., the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996) as an inducement to increasing savings rates for welfare recipients. Two years later, Congress passed the Community Opportunities, Accountability, Training and Educational Services Act of 1998 establishing a governmental funding source for IDAs as one source of matching personal savings. This Act also established a Federal program within the Department of Health and Human Services known as Assets for Independence (AFI). According to its website (http://archive.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ocs/afi/index.html), AFI “provides grants to enable community- based nonprofits and State, local, and Tribal government agencies to implement and demonstrate an asset-based approach for offering low-income families help out of poverty.” These grants allow local IDA organizations to provide a portion of the match for the savings accounts. A listing of the grantees, by state, can be found at http://idaresources.org/afigrantees.
The idea behind IDAs was to establish the habit of savings by people who were known to have low savings rates and to begin to build assets for this group. To assure savings would be used to develop assets, Congress established three targets for how IDA matched funds could be used: (a) home ownership, (b) business ownership, and (c) post-secondary education. The array of community-based AFI grantees may decide to focus on one, two, or all three of the outcomes as a target for the local area and population served. The AFI website presently lists 201 grantees in states across the United States.
The AFIA provides up to a $2,000 match for money saved by individuals who participate in a local IDA program. However, the maximum match for savers can be as high as eight dollars matched for every dollar saved. These additional funds can come from a variety of local sources such as banks, corporate donors, state and local governments, foundations, and other private sources. At least 50% of all matched funds must come from non-federal sources. The length of savings is set at five years. If participants do not meet their goals or drop out, no matching funds are available; but participants do receive all of their personal savings. Participants must attend financial literacy classes offered at no charge by the IDA grantee.
IDAs for People with Disabilities The website for the Assets for Independence Resource Center (http://www.idaresources.org/) provides an excellent section titled “Understanding Asset Development for Individuals with Disabilities.” This useful resource details the ways people with disabilities can participate in local IDA programs and provides suggestions to local IDA grantees on how to better meet the needs of participants with disabilities. However, few individuals with disabilities have taken part in the possibilities offered by AFI grantees and IDAs. The obvious reason involves concern on the part of many people with disabilities that work and accumulating assets will put in jeopardy their access to SSI and Medicaid based on the income and asset limits of those benefits. However, this reluctance is likely due to lack of information about how the Social Security Administration (SSA) treats the target areas of IDA savings accounts. The SSA’s Program Operations Manual System (https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0501130679) clearly states AFI funded IDAs do not count as a resource: “1. Contributions- An individual's contributions that are deposited in a Demonstration Project IDA are excluded from resources. 2. Matching Funds -Any matching funds that are deposited in a Demonstration Project IDA are excluded from resources. 3. Interest- Any interest earned on the individual's own contributions and on the matching funds that are deposited in a Demonstration Project IDA is excluded from resources.”
According to the Center’s website, the following flexibilities are available:
• Home Ownership. SSA regulations permit an SSI beneficiary to own one home of any value as long as the individual lives in it. Parents may even give or transfer ownership of a home to a child on SSI and it will only count as income in the month it is received. In addition, neither home equity loans nor mortgages count as income for SSI eligibility purpose. • Business Ownership. Business ownership is sometimes incorrectly viewed as an unrealistic employment goal for people with significant disabilities. In fact, SSI allows unlimited accumulation of assets (including cash in a business account) for the operation of a small business or micro-enterprise under the exclusion of "property essential for self-support." The same is true for Medicaid eligibility because states cannot adopt Medicaid income and resource rules that are more stringent than those for SSI.
• Post-Secondary Education. SSA offers several resource exclusions to allow SSI beneficiaries to save or pay for post-secondary education. The Social Security Protection Act of 2004 provides a nine-month resource exclusion for grants, scholarships, fellowships, and gifts used to pay for tuition, fees, and other necessary educational expenses at any educational institution. SSI beneficiaries also have access to the standard federal educational assistance programs available to any qualified individual who needs help paying for higher education and SSA provides numerous exclusions for the various forms of educational assistance. Student financial assistance received under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, such as PELL grants and federal work-study programs, are not counted as either income or resources for SSI eligibility purposes.
• Plans for Achieving Self-Support (PASS). The PASS provisions under the Social Security Act are an opportunity for individuals with disabilities to accumulate income and/or resources without causing either ineligibility for SSI or a reduction in benefit payments. Under an approved PASS, an individual may set aside earned income, unearned income, and/or resources in a special account to pay for items or services needed to achieve a specified occupational goal. These income and/or resources are completely disregarded when determining an individual's eligibility for SSI or in calculating the SSI payment amount. Furthermore, federal regulations require that PASS funds be excluded by Medicaid, TANF, food stamps, and HUD rental assistance programs.
This information clearly indicates the flexibilities available for individuals with disabilities receiving SSI who choose to participate in IDAs. Individuals may contact local IDA programs directly (see the link mentioned previously). Most individuals currently receiving SSI will qualify but they will have to apply. Only earned income (i.e., money obtained through employment) can be counted as savings for IDAs. Therefore, to be accepted, participants with disabilities will have to either be employed for pay or own their own business that generates income. Income from sheltered work counts as earned income. According to the AFI Resource Center website, “Other federal programs, including Medicaid, food stamps and HUD housing subsidies are required to disregard TANF and AFI IDA funds from the means- testing process.” Participants will also have to attend financial literacy classes provided by the local IDA program, though they do not have to pass a test for completion and they may receive support to attend.
It is also possible to either create a local AFI/IDA program for a targeted group of individuals or to create a subgroup within an existing program in your community. The more difficult strategy is to create a new program since doing so will require the submission of a grant to AFI as well as finding matching funds. A more workable solution is to join an existing IDA program with a small group of individuals with disabilities. This will require negotiation with a potential local program and it will also require the identification of matching funds, including private sources. An example of this approach follows. A Local Example for Individuals with Disabilities In 2003, the Social Security Administration invited applications for a National Youth Transition Demonstration. The purpose of this demonstration project was to test the effectiveness of SSA waivers and other innovations to increase the number of youth with disabilities transitioning from school to adult employment. Mississippi’s Department of Rehabilitation Services (MDRS), the state Vocational Rehabilitation Agency, was one of seven grantees from six states. One aspect of this initiative, called the Mississippi Youth Transition Innovation (MYTI), was to encourage students and their families to begin saving for future needs as students began earning income through transition jobs. Seventy-seven students became employed in two project sites (local school districts) on the Mississippi Gulf Coast throughout the course of this six-year initiative. I served as technical assistance provider for the project.
In 2004, the MTYI project began looking into the possibility of developing an IDA for students who went to work earning an income. Mississippi has two IDA programs listed on the AFI website. One was Mercy Housing and Human Development, a local faith-based organization that assists individuals with low incomes to save for housing and other assets. While students could have joined the local program individually, the project decided to apply for its own IDA project through the National Cooperative Bank Development Corporation (NCBDC) and to use Mercy Housing as the provider of the required financial literacy classes. The negotiation took nearly two years (interrupted significantly by Hurricane Katrina in 2005) to arrange matching funds. A local bank was identified as the fiduciary.
The MYTI IDA program began in 2006 with $2 of the match coming from AFI via the NCBDC and $2 coming from the Mississippi Department of Rehabilitation Services for every $1 saved by participants. This resulted in a 4:1 match for each dollar saved. The limit of savings to be matched was $1,000 over a five-year period. Priority was offered to MYTI participants and MDRS offered any open slots to individuals with disabilities served in the state VR program. The MYTI participants were students with significant intellectual and developmental disabilities in in two participating school districts, all of whom received SSI payments. By the end of the project in 2010, 24 participants had joined. The following findings emerged:
• Twenty-four participants deposited at least $100 in their savings accounts.
• Seventeen participants originally chose home ownership as a goal.
• Seven participants originally chose business ownership as a goal.
• None of the participants chose post-secondary education as a goal.
• Twelve participants dropped out, 11 of whom had chosen home ownership as a goal and one of whom had chosen business ownership.
• Of the 12 participants who dropped out, 3 were MYTI students who lost their wage jobs.
• All 12 participants who dropped out received all their unmatched personal savings, plus interest. • Eighteen of the 24 total participants reached their financial goal of saving at least $1,000, the maximum to be matched, but six of these dropped out prior to asset purchase.
• The five-year IDA project ended with 12 participants who completed their savings goal of at least $1,000 and made asset purchases—six involving home ownership and six starting business ownership.
• Each of the 12 completing participants had personal savings averaging $1,258 ($258 more than the $1000 target), for an average total, including a 4:1 match of $5,258 to be used for asset purchase.
A Case Example Andrew was a 17-year-old student with autism who participated in the MYTI project. He had a part-time job working in the video offices of a regional electrical utility for about 10 hours a week during the school year. Andrew joined as an IDA participant in 2006. His target was small business development. In his part-time, customized job he was assigned tasks involving video and still imagery duplication within the training department of the utility. With assistance, he recognized he could start a micro-business meeting the same needs for other employers. He saved the maximum amount and, at age 22, purchased equipment and has started his own business offering video and still image duplication to local businesses.
Discussion Based on these data, several observations can be made regarding this small, local IDA effort:
1. Compared to a national drop-out rate of 48% for IDAs nationwide (Schreiner & Sherraden, 2004), the 50% rate observed in this project serving students with disabilities is virtually the same.
2. Achieving a target of home ownership is much more challenging than business development. However, it should be remembered that the housing market collapsed nationwide during the last years of the IDA project making home ownership challenging for all Americans, especially for young, first-time home buyers with disabilities. If participants choose to target home ownership, families and other supporters should carefully consider whether the amount of resources saved and matched would be sufficient to meet the more stringent down-payment requirements of bank following the housing collapse of 2008 – 2010.
3. It is advisable to individually join a local IDA program rather than to try to start a new program from scratch or to create a subset of a local program just for people with disabilities, especially when there are IDA programs in a local area. The amount of work it took to manage the 24 participants by MDRS was far greater than expected, base on comments in quarterly reports to NCBDC.
4. No participants in this project targeted post-secondary opportunities. At least part of this exclusion likely relates to the very recent expansion of post-secondary options for individuals with more significant disabilities. At the initiation of this effort, there were no options available in Mississippi. None of the three major universities had a program for students with intellectual and development disabilities. As inclusive postsecondary educational options are expanding rapidly, a target of post-secondary education is a perfect fit for transitioning students and the money saved would go a long way in covering expenses.
5. The success of business ownership ad a target is very encouraging. Only one participant who targeted business ownership dropped out of their savings goals and the amount of money saved is consistent with that required to start a micro-enterprise. However, care must be taken to assist individuals with disabilities to think through and plan for their proposed business venture and as well as to assist them in running and maintaining their business. Resources for assisting individuals with disabilities to start small business are available at http://www.start-up-usa.biz.
6. Individuals with significant disabilities will need on-going support to apply, attend classes, and deposit savings in their accounts. This responsibility will likely fall on family members unless supports can be negotiated as a aspect of community living services offered in one’s community or through an IEP goal for students in special education.
7. Remember, only earned income (i.e., money made while working) may be deposited in an IDA. Income must be verified in order to receive matching funds, even for money made by entrepreneurial efforts. This is a strong rationale for students with disabilities to have part-time, paid jobs so they can start a habit of saving and have the earned income necessary to target one of the outcomes of an IDA.
About the Author Michael Callahan is the president of Marc Gold & Associates, a network of consultants that focuses on employment and community participation of all individuals with disabilities. He works primarily in the areas of customized employment and discovery, concepts that provide an alternative to traditional approaches that often exclude individuals with the most significant disabilities.
References Community Opportunities, Accountability, Training and Educational Services Act of 1998. Public Law 105- 285.
Mississippi Department of Rehabilitation Services. (2010). Assets for Independence program: Narrative program progress report. Madison, MS: Author.
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. Public Law 104-193.
Schreiner, M., & Sherraden, M. (2005). Drop-out from individual development accounts: Prediction and prevention. Financial Services Review, 14, 37-54.
Social Security Administration. (2012). Social Security red book. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/redbook/eng/introduction.htm Social Security Administration. (2013). Social Security program operational manual system (POMS). Washington, DC: Author. https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0501130679
Designing and Evaluating Asset Building Programs for People with Disabilities: The Washington Experience By Frances E. Pennell & Leann Wicklund
Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to (a) live independently; (b) enjoy self-determination and make choices; (c) benefit from an education; (d) pursue meaningful careers; and (e) enjoy full inclusion and integration in the economic, political, social, cultural, and educational mainstream of society in the United States.
Assistive Technology Act of 1998 as amended, 29 USC 3001 et seq. Although there is little hard data on the issue, it is commonly believed that people with disabilities do not participate in asset building at anticipated rates given the strong association between poverty and disability in our society (Harris & Weinberger-Divack, 2010). People who live in poverty in the United States disproportionately have a disability and people with disabilities are disproportionately poor (Brault, 2012; Fremstad, 2009; Harris & Weinberger-Divack, 2010; National Organization on Disability, 2010). However, because few programs collect disability-related data, it remains unclear how many people with disabilities are involved in asset building throughout the United States.
That said, it would not be surprising to find low rates of participation by people with disabilities in asset- building programs for several reasons. First, almost all Individual Development Account (IDA) programs—and certainly all IDAs funded through the Assets for Independence (AFI) program—require savings from earned income. This requirement excludes the very large percentage of individuals with disabilities who are not employed. According to the 2010 American Community Survey, of the estimated 18.3 million working-age adults with disabilities in the United States, only 33.9% were employed and only 20.9% were employed fulltime (see www.disabilitystatistics.org). Disability, of course, is not limited to working-age adults. Indeed, the incidence of disability is strongly correlated with age. Counting adults with disabilities over the age of 65 and those under 65 who were not employed in 2010, we roughly estimate that 78% had no earned income (as compared to only 33% of those without disabilities) and thus could not participate in AFI-funded IDAs unless their spouses or other household members had earned income to contribute.
A more sophisticated analysis of the impact of the earned income requirement on participation by individuals with disabilities in AFI-funded IDAs (including amounts that can be saved) would take into account household size and a range of other relevant factors (Lombe, Huang, Putnam, & Cooney, 2010). However, there is no doubt that the requirement is widely perceived as one of the major reasons why individuals with disabilities do not participate in IDA Programs (see www.idaresources.org).
AFI’s earned income requirement is just one barrier. Other commonly mentioned barriers include:
• Public policies (such as asset limits) that create disincentives to save; • Lack of outreach to, and awareness about asset building, within the disability community;
• The widely held misconception (within both the asset building and disability communities) that accumulating savings in an IDA program will jeopardize disability-related benefits;
• Lack of knowledge among asset building programs regarding the rules that impact disability benefits; etiquette and best practices in working with individuals with disabilities; and
• Requirements and resources for providing reasonable accommodations, including ASL interpreters and materials in accessible formats.
In this article, we describe our efforts to create an IDA program designed to address some of these barriers. Our program focuses on access to technology—including assistive technology needed for any purpose and business equipment needed for employment and/or self-employment. The program is still a work in progress, but we believe it shows great promise. The IDA program builds upon, and is operated in coordination with, our Assistive Technology and Business Equipment Loan programs—both of which function as another important asset building tool. Each of these programs is described below.
Access to Technology, Asset Building, and Economic Opportunity
Low Interest Loans for Assistive Technology & Business Equipment The Washington Access Fund (“the Fund”) is a statewide nonprofit Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI). Its mission is to promote access to technology and economic opportunity for Washington residents with disabilities. The Fund is one of 35-40 statewide organizations across the United States to offer low interest loans for assistive technology devices and services to individuals with disabilities and their families. Most (but not all) of the Assistive Technology Loan programs were established with grants from the U.S. Department of Education (Rehabilitation Services Administration) under Title III of the Assistive Technology Act of 1998 (as amended by the Assistive Technology Act of 2004).
The Assistive Technology Act (also known as the Tech Act) was passed by Congress in 1988 as the Technology Related Assistance Act. Its overarching mission is to improve access to assistive technology for people with disabilities (Alper & Raharinirina, 2006; Harris & Weinberger-Divack, 2010). Assistive technology is broadly defined to include any device that maintains or enhances the functional capabilities of an individual with a disability plus related services such as evaluations, training, warranties and repairs. Examples include items specially designed for individuals with disabilities (e.g., hearing aids, wheelchairs, Braille devices, home and vehicle modifications) as well as the growing numbers of mainstream devices that also benefit individuals with disabilities (e.g., computers, cell phones, iPods, iPads, tablets).
Early on, Congress identified “lack of financing” as a major reason why many individuals with disabilities were unable to acquire the assistive technologies needed to live independently and to participate fully in education, employment, recreation, and community life. Although it is often assumed that assistive technology is always paid for by public and private health insurance and/or other government programs, this is not the case. Research indicates that about 50% of all assistive technology is financed by individuals with disabilities or their families using their own resources (Carlson, Dawn, & Ehrlich, 2006). This number includes items paid for by individuals who have no insurance and those not typically covered by insurance (or other programs unless you fit their particular criteria) such as hearing aids, equipment for individuals who are blind or visually impaired, home modifications, vehicle modifications, computers and tablets with specialized software and hardware, and adapted recreation and exercise equipment (Parish, Grinstein-Weiss, Yeo, Rose, & Rimmerman, 2010).
To help people with disabilities bridge these financing gaps, Congress appropriated funding beginning in 2000 under Title III of the Assistive Technology Act of 1998 for competitive grants to states and territories for the purpose of establishing, expanding and administering “alternative financing programs” (“AFPs”) to help people with disabilities “and their family members. . . purchase assistive technology devices and … services…” (Section 301 of the Assistive Technology Act of 1998). Under these grants, states were required to contract with Community-Based Organizations that have “individuals with disabilities involved in . . . decision-making at all organizational levels” to administer the AFPs (Section 304). The AFP programs were otherwise to be carried out so as to expand and emphasize consumer choice and control (Section 303(b)). In other words, people with disabilities were to design and implement these programs in ways that fostered personal choice and self-determination.
The Access Fund’s Business Equipment Loan Program is also financed with a U.S. Department of Education grant. It is one of 20 similar programs throughout the United States – all funded through a 2003 “Access to Telework” grant opportunity (offered in conjunction with a Title III competition) under President George W. Bush’s New Freedom Initiative. The initial goal of the Telework Program was to improve access to “Telework” by providing low-interest loans to help people with disabilities pay for business equipment (e.g., Internet access, printers, faxes, computers) needed to work from home. Over the years, the Department of Education has expanded the allowable uses of these funds to include loans for business equipment needed for employment or self-employment regardless of location. As with Title III, the Telework grants were awarded to state agencies which were required to contract with Community Based Organizations controlled by individuals with disabilities and to otherwise carry out the Telework program so as to expand and emphasize consumer choice and control. Most of the Telework programs are administered by and/or in conjunction with the Assistive Technology Loan Funds (National Assistive Technology Technical Assistance Project, 2010; Resna Catalyst Project, 2012). To find out if there is an Assistive Technology or Telework Loan Fund in your state, visit the RESNA website (www.resnaprojects.org/allcontacts/allafpcontacts.html).
Outcomes and impact. While the structure of the Alternative Financing and Telework Loan Funds varies from state to state, all share the common goal of helping people with disabilities (especially individuals and households living in poverty) pay for technology-related assets needed for employment, self- employment, education or independent living. Most Loan Funds are set up as Loan Guarantee programs – with the Community Based Organizations guaranteeing loans made by a partner bank. Washington, by contrast, is a direct lender—meaning that we receive, process, and service all of our loans rather than relying upon a partner bank. We like this model because it allows us to set our own policies within the U.S. Department of Education guidelines. Through our programs, loans of up to $10,000 are available to individuals with disabilities of all ages for assistive technology devices and services (including home and vehicle accessibility modifications) and for business equipment needed for employment or self-employment. There is no “minimum” dollar amount and there are no upper or lower income limits. However, our focus is on helping individuals with low income and limited assets. We consider all sources of income, including both earned and unearned income. Many of our clients are on SSI (just $699 per month), SSDI, or social security. The interest rate is 5% for loan terms of up to five years depending upon the useful life of the item purchased and the applicant’s budget. Eligible borrowers include individuals with disabilities and their families.
The loan application is available online (www.washingtonaccessfund.org) and/or in alternative formats—including large print and Braille. The application asks for information about the applicant’s assets, liabilities, income, and expenses as one means of determining how much room there is in his or her budget for a loan payment. Poor or no credit is not per se a disqualifier; many clients have not taken out a loan before, others have credit issues related to their disability (medical debt; loss of employment). Repayment is via Electronic Funds Transfer (ETF) on the client’s preferred day of the month and repayment histories are reported to the Credit Bureaus via our membership in Credit Builders Alliance (www.creditbuildersalliance.org) with the goal of helping clients build (or repair) credit. If we cannot approve a loan, we try to identify other resources and borrowers who do not meet regular underwriting standards may also qualify for a $500 credit builder loan. If the credit builder loan is successfully repaid, the client is then eligible for a larger loan.
Technical assistance offered to clients and potential clients includes: referrals to appropriate vendors and service providers, tips and advice on selecting and funding assistive technology, informal assistance and referrals on money management and credit issues, and small business planning assistance. This information is provided individually, through live webinars available to clients statewide (including a seven week small business planning course), and via resource lists compiled and maintained by Access Fund staff.
The Fund has made more than 500 loans to date—disbursing more than $1.7 million. The average loan size is about $3,300. The most popular items financed include hearing aids, modified vehicles, computers, and vision aids—all items typically not funded through other sources. We also have financed a wide range of other devices, such as wheelchairs and wheelchair co-pays (plus features such as elevating seats that insurance and Medicare do not cover), cell phones, iPads, adaptive bikes, other recreation equipment; and therapeutic mattresses. The business equipment loans have been used to finance computers, iPads, business vehicles (with and without modifications), video equipment, costumes, office furniture, office modifications, retail location build-outs, Internet access, landscaping equipment, embroidery software, and commercial grade sergers and a wide range of other devices.
Most borrowers have low incomes. More than two thirds live in households at or below 80% of the statewide median and almost half are at or below 50% of the statewide median. Many borrowers above these thresholds also face financial challenges. Indeed, depending upon the year, 88-96% of loan clients report coming to the Access Fund because it was the only way they could pay for the technologies they needed. Nevertheless, we enjoy a low 1.8 % default rate (dollars written off as a percentage of all loans disbursed to date), which serves as a testament to the importance of these technologies in the lives of our clients and our ability to be flexible when borrowers run into financial challenges.
Impact is measured by means of a voluntary, annual client survey. Borrowers who return their surveys by the deadline are entered into a drawing for cash rewards ranging from $25 to $100. Although response rates vary, results consistently demonstrate the important role of accessible and affordable credit in helping individuals with disabilities acquire technology-related assets. In our 2011 survey of 69 individuals, 91% reported that they chose to take out a loan through the Access Fund because it was the only way they could afford the technologies they needed. Other reasons cited include the Access Fund’s competitive interest rates, the fact that the Fund accommodates income and/or credit history, and the availability of a flexible payment plan. More than one third noted that they also chose to work with the Access Fund because there are no restrictions based upon “disability, age, sex or race.”
The 2011 surveys also demonstrate the important role these technologies play in the lives of individuals with disabilities. Although the items purchased were diverse, 92% reported these technologies had improved their quality of life (71% reporting a strong impact) and 85% reported the equipment they purchased had improved their self confidence (66% reporting a strong impact on self confidence). Other improvements also were noted in the following areas:
• Managing Tasks of Daily Living: Of the 49 clients who purchased assistive technology, 41 reported using this technology to perform tasks of daily living. Almost 90% of these individuals reported improvements in the ability to perform such tasks (e.g., ability to manage finances, undertake home and personal management activities, stay in their current living situation and manage personal health, medical and safety issues).
• Participation in Family and Community Life: Of the 44 borrowers who indicated they used their assistive technologies to interact with friends and loved ones, 91% reported improvements in their ability to do so (61% reported strong improvements). Positive outcomes also were reported in the ability to participate in important life roles, recreation and hobbies, religious and community activities, and sports and recreation.
• Participation in Education: Of the 18 respondents who used their equipment to participate in educational and learning activities, 89% reported an improved ability to participate in such activities (44% reported strong improvements).
• Participation in Employment: Among the 32 participants who were working, 21 were employed and 11 were self-employed. Among the 15 who used technologies, 93% reported improvements in job productivity, 87% in job performance, 87% in job satisfaction, 67% in the ability to work more hours, 77% in the ability to seek a promotion or better job, and 77% in earnings.
• Participation in Self-Employment: All of the nine respondents who used the technologies they purchased for self-employment seemed to have benefitted substantially from access to these technologies—with 100% noting improvements in job productivity, job performance and job satisfaction, and 87% noting improvements in the ability to work more hours and earnings. Seven also reported improvements in personal income. All nine reported that their self- employment had helped them to “build employment and business skills,” “provided an opportunity to showcase their talents,” and increased their confidence as an individual in the workplace.
Survey participants also reported positive results from the Technical Assistance offered by Access Fund staff. For example:
• Among the 33 individuals who received information about community, business, or assistive technology resources, 88% reported a positive impact on their knowledge of such resources.
• Among the 35 individuals who received the right assistive technologies, 86% reported a positive impact on their ability to choose the right technologies.
• Among the 40 individuals who received tips and advice on personal finances and debt, 85% reported a positive impact on their ability to manage finances and debt.
• Among the 36 individuals who received information about credit scores and personal credit (36 respondents), 81% reported an improved understanding of these topics.
• Among the 26 individuals who received information about how to start or expand a small business, 77% reported improved understanding of this process.
• Among the 21 individuals who received information on how to write a business plan, 76% reported improvements in their understanding of this topic.
• Among the 21 individuals who received help managing business and business finances, 71% reported a positive impact on their ability to manage their business and business finances.
These findings demonstrate the high value of, and need for, specialized low interest loan programs as a strategy (along with appropriate technical assistance) for helping individuals with disabilities with low incomes acquire technology-related assets. They also demonstrate the promising role of such assets in empowering individuals with disabilities to more fully participate in the economic and social mainstream of our society.
Incorporating Asset Building into Assistive Technology and Business Equipment Loan Programs In 2007, drawing upon our experience in providing loans for assistive technology and business equipment, the Access Fund began to talk with others in the community about the idea of pulling together an Assistive Technology Individual Development Account pilot project. We wanted an IDA program to be offered in conjunction with our loans that would help us reach individuals with very low incomes. We also saw that many clients would benefit from financial education and assistive technology training. These discussions eventually led to the creation of three IDA pilot projects specially designed for individuals with disabilities: (1) an Assistive Technology for Work Related Activities IDA administered in collaboration with United Way of King County, (2) a Business Equipment IDA funded with U.S. Department permission using our Access to Telework grant, and (3) an Assistive Technology IDA (for any purposes) funded through a three-year grant from the Paul G. Allen Family Foundation. The first pilot was completed in 2011; the other two are ongoing.
1. Assistive Technology for Work-Related Activities Pilot Project The Assistive Technology for Work Related Activities Pilot project could not have been launched without Washington’s innovative legislation, known as the SEED Act (RCW 43.31.450 et seq). The SEED Act was passed with the goal of stimulating programs and investments that would help low-income households in Washington build assets. In addition to funding a statewide and local asset building coalitions, the Act established a state IDA program through which “sponsoring organizations” could apply to offer IDAs for the three traditional AFI assets (i.e., first time homeownership, higher education, job training, and small business) plus computers, vehicles, and purchases of “assistive technologies that will allow a person with a disability to participate in work-related activities” (RCW 43.31.460(2)(e)). The Act permitted participants to save from either earned income or “other income, as provided by the department [including] … supplemental security income, and disability benefits” (RCW 43.31.460(3)). The Act further provides that client savings held in IDAs established under the SEED Act “shall not be used in the determination of eligibility for, of the amount of, assistance in any state or federal means-tested program”—an important provision for state-funded benefits, but one that likely has no effect when it comes to Federal benefits rules.
The United Way of King County was designated as a sponsoring organization under the SEED Act, serving as an umbrella agency for a group of nonprofits (known as the Collaborative) that provided both state and AFI-funded IDAs throughout the Seattle-King County area. The United Way agreed to collaborate with the Access Fund in offering an Assistive Technology IDA Pilot on a statewide basis. It set aside $40,000 in state funds for IDA participant match and granted the Access Fund a small amount ($8,000) for program administration over a three-year period. Additional operating expenses (including client services) were supported by the U.S. Department of Education Telework and Alternative Financing Program grants. The pilot was launched in February 2008 and ended in June 2011.
The Pilot was set up to be as flexible as possible within state and United Way guidelines:
• We used broad definitions of both Assistive Technology and Work Related Activities -- allowing participants to save for Assistive Technology needed for employment or self-employment and/or, if needed, for training or education that could lead to work.
• Clients were asked to identify their Assistive Technology purchase goals at enrollment, but had the option of modifying those goals as needs changed.
• Eligibility included individuals with disabilities (and/or their families) living in households at or below 80% of the county median income and net assets of $10,000 or less not counting a primary home or vehicle. Following United Way guidelines, unearned income was not considered in determining eligibility. • Students as young as 15 could participate as long as they were 18 by the time they made their first purchase. Adults with disabilities living with their parents or other family members were treated as their own “household” for eligibility purposes as long as they qualified as a household under Social Security Administration guidelines.
• Saving could be from earned or unearned income, including SSI and SSDI as well as gifts from family members. As far as we know, we were the only organization statewide to take advantage of the SEED Act’s provision allowing saving from unearned income. All other sponsoring organizations used SEED Act dollars for AFI match and thus had to require earned income. Saving was generally by EFT on a day of the month chosen by the participant.
• United Way asked clients to identify either a $2,000 or $4,000 savings goal with a match of one- to-one.
• Clients could save as little as $10/month, but had to save for at least six months. In addition, they had to complete Financial Education and Assistive Technology Trainings before a purchase could be made. Participants had up to three years to reach their overall savings goals.
• All savings were placed in a custodial account in our name for the benefit of the client and could not be withdrawn without permission. All payment for purchases was sent directly to the vendor from whom the Technology was to be purchased. Under these circumstances, as verified by the Social Security Administration, the savings would not count as “resources” for the purposes of SSI Asset Limits.
• Applicants were approved on a first come, first served basis.
Participants. A total of 17 investors participated in the program throughout the three years (as many as we could accommodate with $40,000). The $2,000 and $4,000 limits were not realistic for all participants and some set lower actual personal savings goals. Once these personal goals were achieved, we were able to re-allocate the unused match to new accounts. Participants represented eight counties across the state. At the time of application, the youngest saver was 17 and the oldest was 63 (Mdn = 41 years). Disabilities included mobility disabilities (e.g., quadriplegia, cerebral palsy, and partial paralysis), speech dysarthria, low-vision, blindness, hard of hearing, deafness, and developmental disabilities (e.g., autism). Fourteen participants were male and eight had more than a high school education.
Ten of the IDA participants were unemployed (three of whom were in school) and were actively seeking employment, looking into self-employment, or planning to look for employment after school. Three participants were self-employed and four were employed part-time. Total annual household income (including earned and unearned) ranged from $6,879 to $56,960 (Mdn = $14,148). Earned income ranged from $0 (seven participants) to $42,500 (Mdn = $1,743). Unearned income ranged from $6,879 to $27,444 (Mdn = $9,600). Eleven participants received SSDI and seven received SSI; one participant received both. Based on earned income alone, 16 households were below 50% of the county median and one household fell between 50-80%. Including both earned and unearned income, 12 households were below 50% of the county median, 4 households were between 50-80% of the county median, and one household fell between 80-100% of the county median.
Upon intake, the average household net worth for all participants was -$5,215.85 (Mdn = $313). (Per United Way guidelines, debt and equity related to a primary dwelling or vehicle were not counted.) Balances for participant household bank accounts ranged from $7.49 to $3,200; one participant had no bank account. Savings account balances ranged from $0 to $1,200; six participants had no savings account. Seven participants reported having credit card debt (M = $1,950; range, $200-$10,000). Four participants had student loan debt (M = $24,089; range, $556 to $45,000). Asked to identify barriers to making a better life for themselves and their families, the top three reasons given were (a) not having enough money (12 participants), (b) disability (10 participants), and lack of steady work (6 participants).
Implementation. The pilot project required savers to make a minimum deposit of $10 each month. Most participants were able to do so with a couple of approved exceptions for those who requested a temporary “leave of absence” from the program (allowed for up to six months due to financial hardship). Only one participant was unable to save regularly and was eventually terminated from the program, but after she made her first purchase.
All participants successfully completed both required trainings. The “Assistive Technology Selection & Funding” training was done one-on-one with Access Fund staff. Staff worked closely with each of the participants and, in a number of cases, their families, to provide a training that was appropriate and meaningful. For the Financial Education training requirement, we referred participants to a variety of agencies and organizations providing financial education courses. We completed the training one-on- one with a few participants who had very specific needs. For example, the Fund trained the client on how to use Mint.com so he (and his Mom) could see all of his account activity, better understand where his household money was going, and know how much he had left to spend.
It was often difficult to find Financial Education training that was appropriate and accessible. For example, a participant in a rural area who was deaf and learned best by doing things in person had a difficult time finding a qualified course nearby that would provide an interpreter. A blind participant who was very independent and proficient with computers had a very difficult time completing an online training because the materials were inaccessible to her screen reader.
Outcomes and Client Feedback. All participants successfully made at least one Assistive Technology purchase and most made multiple (the total amount going towards asset purchases of assistive technology was $64,196.38). Technologies purchased included:
• Laptops (6) and desktop computers (3), as well as related hardware and software (e.g., screen magnification programs, speech recognition, suitable desks and chairs);
• Vehicles (4 modified; 1 not modified for an individual with PTSD) and one ramp repair;
• Low-vision technology and training (e.g., dollar bill identifier, Braille notetaker, color identifier, talking alarm clock, talking blood pressure monitor, iPod touch, CCTV); • Wheelchair and one wheelchair repair;
• Hearing aids;
• Dentures; and
• Augmentative and alternative communication devices (e.g., communication cards, boards, task- timers).
Most (11 of 17) participants saved more than they initially thought that they could. Although initial personal savings goals totaled $24,530, actual savings totaled $32,598. Some participants tripled their initial savings goals and one participant saved five times as much as he thought he could by using a lump-sum deposit from a tax return. A few participants did not reach their personal savings goals. One participant decided he wanted to focus on homeownership rather than assistive technology so he left the program to join a different one. Another was able to purchase everything he needed at a lower cost than anticipated. A few others were unable to reach their goals because they just could not find it in their budget to save enough in the amount of time available. Some of those individuals are continuing to save in the Access Fund’s new IDA pilots.
We gathered client feedback through exit surveys submitted upon completion of the program. Sixteen participants completed the surveys (one passed away during the pilot). When asked why they chose to participate in the IDA program, 14 participants indicated the number one reason was that it was the only way they could afford to pay for the equipment they needed.
One goal of the Assistive Technology training was to identify practical steps and resources to improve the chances participants would select the “right” technology and also obtain needed services. In their exit surveys, all of the IDA participants reported they were using their technology and that it met their expectations. When asked to rate how helpful this training was, most found it to be helpful. A few already had years of personal experience with finding and funding assistive devices. Regardless, most participants said they learned something about assistive technology and funding they did not previously know. As mentioned by one participant, “We did the AT training over the phone and on the computer. Not only helped us, but we were able to invite a friend who has a son living with autism. We really appreciate the support…!”
All but one of the participants said the assistive technology they purchased improved their self- confidence and all reported the assistive technology improved their quality of life. Two participants said the technology they purchased was not applicable to their self-confidence or quality of life. When asked if it was helpful to have their monthly savings deposit made through EFT, all respondents said yes. While the match was certainly an incentive, the importance of making savings part of an individual’s budget as well as something that occurs automatically, makes saving easier to do and part of a routine planned “expense.”
Participants were asked to rate the helpfulness of the financial literacy training. Nine participants said it was somewhat or very helpful, five found it to be both helpful and not helpful, and two said it was not very or not at all helpful. One participant who thought the training was too elementary later found a more suitable training that ultimately helped him get out of debt. In evaluating these results, it is important to note that participants were able to meet the Financial Education requirement by using any one of several approved courses on the Access Fund’s Financial Education Resource List. Although not all participants were happy with their chosen Financial Education Program, exit survey findings suggest that participating in the IDA did have a positive impact on financial habits. Upon exit from the IDA program, all participants said they either sometimes or always used a budget to monitor their spending. More participants said they kept an emergency fund or made deposits into a savings account; fewer took out payday loans or cash advances.
Participants were asked if they would participate in the IDA program again. All but one client responded “yes, they would.” The participant who said no indicated he did not think he would qualify. This particular client has been focusing on paying down his debt and building a very successful small business together with his wife. Upon exit from the IDA program, their business revenue had grown by 300%. All respondents indicated they were satisfied with the IDA program, with 13 saying they were very satisfied. All said they would recommend the program to other people who needed help paying for assistive technology. As one participant noted, “Thank you so much, this is an awesome program, and has changed my life. I feel more confident, hopeful, and independent. Life is easier.”
The IDA participants in this pilot gained productive assets, whether or not they gained employment. The assistive technology they purchased had a meaningful impact and has aided in independence and development as participants continue to work on the goal of employment or self-employment. One of the Access Fund’s goals in setting up the IDA Program was to supplement our loan program to provide clients with another option for financing. Some Access Fund loan applicants have not been “loan ready” and participating in an IDA is a great way to prepare an individual. Through financial education and making monthly deposits into an account (similar to a loan payment), IDAs are a great match for the Access Fund’s programs. Another goal in setting up the IDA Program was to prepare individuals for future assistive technology purchases. For example, some loan clients have been able to take advantage of the IDA to help them plan and save for assistive technology they will need down the road. Providing a tool for clients to better plan for their future means that fewer people with disabilities will have to go without the assistive technology they need.
2. The New Pilots: IDAs for Business Equipment & Assistive Technology Based upon the results from our first pilot, the Access Fund petitioned the U.S. Department of Education to approve use of a portion of its Access to Telework grant to fund a Business Equipment IDA pilot project. Many of the Telework Program applicants (particularly those interested in self-employment) simply were not “ready” in terms of skills, resources, and assets. An IDA program would give them a chance to save, acquire needed assets, develop a good business plan, and otherwise prepare to launch into self-employment. The Department of Education agreed and the Business Equipment IDA was launched in October 2010. In December 2010, the Access Fund also received a grant from the Paul G. Allen Family Foundation to launch a new Assistive Technology IDA Pilot offering matched savings accounts for assistive technology needed for any purpose, not just work-related activities. These programs build upon our very positive experience with the United Way pilot. Most of the parameters, policies and procedures (e.g., saving by electronic funds transfer) are the same. However, because the Telework and Allen Foundation grants came without any of the traditional AFI IDA restrictions, we also have been able to test some new elements of program design:
• In determining income eligibility, we allow applicants to identify and deduct medical and other disability related expenses.
• The net Asset Limit is $20,000 (rather than the $10,000 AFI limit). All retirement accounts are excluded from the net asset calculation, as are modified vehicles, special needs trusts, and personal savings of up to $2,000 for an individual and $5,000 for a household.
We also are working to develop a financial education curriculum focusing on the particular needs of individuals with disabilities. This is in response to participant comments in the United Way pilot noting they wished the Financial Education trainings included more disability specific content. Modules (offered via webinar) to date include Applying for SSI, SSDI; Work Incentives & Benefits planning, Special needs trusts and guardianships, PASS Plans, and “Tax Time” considerations. These modules supplement the generic Financial Education courses on our “approved Financial Education Course” resource list. Participants have included service providers, clients, and potential clients.
The most valuable change we have made is the addition of a qualified Benefits Planner. The Benefits Planner offers Brief Benefits Consults to every interested IDA participant (as well as some of our loan clients). This includes a review of the benefits the client is currently receiving, other benefits for which they might be eligible, a review of work incentives available to them, and planning assistance for those who are starting small businesses. The Benefits Planner is also available to Access Fund staff to answer the range of complex issues that come up (e.g., if the client takes an emergency withdrawal from the IDA account how could that impact their child’s SSI benefits).
As of July 1st, 2013, 61 individuals had enrolled in the new Pilots—28 in the Business Equipment IDA, 32 in the Assistive Technology IDA, and one person is saving a little in both programs. Four of the IDA participants who were saving in the first pilot rolled over into the new demonstration projects. Together, these two programs now account for well over $175,000 in match commitments. Four participants have successfully completed their savings goals to date. Participants have three years to save—so it will still be a year or more before we have enough data to document outcomes.
3. Other Outcomes—Collaboration with the Broader Asset Building Community One of the most important outcomes from our efforts to incorporate asset building into our Assistive Technology and Business Equipment financing programs has been the opportunity to collaborate with, and learn from, the broader asset building community including, in particular, the Seattle King County Asset Building Collaborative and its Financial Education Partners Network. This very active organization has embraced the need to promote inclusion of individuals with disabilities. It has incorporated disability issues and resources into the Financial Empowerment trainings it provides to case managers, state and local agency staff, and other entities. It has helped us to identify and connect with Financial Education resources both in King County and throughout the state. It also has established a Disability Workgroup to promote outreach to, and inclusion of, individuals with disabilities and to educate Asset Builders on best practices in serving people with disabilities. Working with the National Disability Institute’s Real Economic Impact Tour (www.realeconomicimpact.org), the Work Group has held an Asset Building Summit as well as a very popular Benefits training for case managers. These activities have provided a forum for sharing information about the disability community, the economic challenges faced by individuals with disabilities, and the role of assistive technology in addressing those challenges. These activities also remind Asset Builders about the importance of providing reasonable accommodations and taking other steps to facilitate full inclusion of individuals with disabilities.
Policy Implications As demonstrated by these promising projects, “asset building” strategies have high potential for promoting economic opportunity and empowerment for individuals with disabilities with low incomes. At the same time, additional steps are needed to make asset building accessible to individuals with disabilities.
1. Allow saving from unearned income in AFI Funded (and other) IDA Programs. The Assets for Independence (AFI) IDA program—and even many state IDA programs —only allow saving from earned income. This requirement is hard to justify for a program intended to help individuals move out of poverty. This is particularly true for adults with disabilities who have incredibly low rates of workforce participation and many of whom face lifelong barriers to employment. Is it fair, or even optimal, under these circumstances, to exclude individuals with disabilities from IDA program participation just because they do not have earned income? Allowing the use of unearned income would give many more individuals with disabilities the opportunity to save for higher education, a small business, a home of one’s own, and assistive technology and business equipment. Both AFI and state and privately funded IDA programs should follow Washington’s lead in the SEED Act and allow individuals with disabilities (and other persons with significant barriers to employment) the opportunity to save from either earned or unearned income.
2. Rethink asset options for assistive technology, business equipment, and other identified needs. Ask nearly any individual with a disability about the assistive technologies they use on a daily basis and they will tell you these are some of their very most important assets. Assistive technology plays an important role in improving overall quality of life and in helping individuals with disabilities live more independent and productive lives. Just as it has supported the development of Alternative Financing Programs (Low interest Loans) for Assistive Technology, the Federal Government (and state IDA programs) should promote acquisition of such technologies through AFI-funded IDAs by designating Assistive Technology as an eligible asset. Not only would this help individuals with limited income acquire much needed assistive technology, but it would promote greater collaboration and cooperation between the asset building and disability c Pennellommunities. The same could be said for “Business Equipment” needed for employment and self-employment as well as other assets associated with economic opportunity. In our state, community advocates are beginning to talk about using IDAs to save for other important disability-related assets including items needed to overcome barriers to employment -- (e.g., suitable clothing, transportation, and items not covered by other programs) and long-term Transition and Employment Support needs of individuals with developmental disabilities. 3. Create incentives and improve the participants’ capacity to save in non-AFI IDA programs. Participants in AFI- and TANF-funded IDAs are allowed to exclude the amounts saved each month from their income for the purpose of determining eligibility and payment amounts under SSI and SSDI. Basically, this means that AFI (and TANF) IDA savers do not experience a decrease in cash flow – just because they are saving (POMS Section: SI 01130.679). This is a particularly important feature for individuals who are employed and those who have very low incomes, including SSI recipients. In theory, this provision should allow these individuals to save more and save more consistently. This provision does not apply to State and privately funded (Foundations) IDAs. For individuals participating in these IDAs, there is no “make up” for dollars set aside. This surely impacts the capacity of participants with the lowest incomes to save.
Savings in federally funded IDAs also do not count as assets for the purposes of determining eligibility for any federally funded program. IDAs funded by the states or, as in our case, private foundations, do not enjoy this statutory exclusion. Fear of losing benefits is a major concern for individuals with disabilities and one that no doubt serves as a big disincentive for saving and participation in IDAs. To protect and promote efforts to include individuals with disabilities in matched savings programs, participants in state or privately funded IDA programs (not just AFI and TANF funded IDAs) should be allowed to (a) deduct the amounts saved from their income for purposes of determining eligibility for, and payment amounts under, SSI/SSDI; and (b) exclude savings in an IDA account for purposes of any federal asset limit test (Ball, Morris, Hartnette, & Blanck, 2006).
4. Provide federal funding to support and expand Assistive Technology loan funds. The initial goal of Title III of the Assistive Technology Act was to establish statewide (sustainable) low interest loan funds in each of the 56 States and Territories so that individuals with disabilities in every state would have a place they could go for affordable financing of Assistive Technology. Title III funding for Alternative Financing Programs was eliminated with the 2004 reauthorization of the Tech Act. In total, Congress disbursed $60.2 million dollars under Title III to establish or expand AFPs in 33 states and territories. As of FY2010, more than $120.3 million in loans had been disbursed to 11,021 adults and children with disabilities – more than doubling the Federal investment. These figures do not include all loans made by those programs that also leverage non-AFP dollars.
Title III was eliminated before the goal of establishing a sustainable Assistive Technology Loan Fund in every state was reached. Sixteen states received more than $1,000,000 (including three that received more than $6,000,0000), 14 received less than $1,000,000 (with amounts ranging from $150,000 to $902,612), and 23 received no AFP funding. Many of the states were not funded at levels that could be considered “sustainable.” After 2004, “state financing” continued to be identified as a priority in the Tech Act—but without dedicated funding. While some state Tech Act Projects provide much-needed support for a portion of operating expenses, realistically these programs do not have the resources needed to capitalize or recapitalize a loan fund. In FY12, Congress included $2,000,000 in its budget appropriation for new grants to establish and/or expand Assistive Technology Loan Funds, eliminated the match requirement and allowed both states and nonprofit community based organizations to apply directly for funding. Seventeen applications were submitted in response to the 2012 NOFA, demonstrating a strong level of need for, and interest in, AFPs throughout the United States. Just three grants (Montana, Idaho and California) were awarded (ranging in size from a little more than $300,000 to $983,000). An additional $2,000,000 in AFP Funding was included in the FY2013 Department of Education Budget – under the FY13 Continuing Resolution. Currently, there is no additional AFP funding designated in the FY14 Budget.
Given the demonstrated success of AFPs in helping individuals with disabilities throughout the United States pay for much-needed assistive technologies, Congress should approve additional funding for AFP programs in its FY2014 Budget and create a new stream of dedicated funding for Alternative Financing Programs as part of the scheduled reauthorization of the Tech Act or through another mechanism, as appropriate
5. Design financial education and asset-specific training to meet the needs of individuals with disabilities. One surprise in working with asset building programs is that not every agency understands (or budgets for) its obligation to provide reasonable accommodations under Titles II and/or III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. We have encountered “push back” from organizations working on Free Tax Preparation and others who provide Financial Education and Asset Specific Training. AFI and other federal programs that promote and fund Financial Education and IDAs should require all grantees to describe how they will incorporate individuals with disabilities in their asset building programs, to agree that they will provide reasonable accommodations and materials in alternative formats—and to plan and budget for such expenses and activities.
Conclusion As the Washington experience demonstrates, low-interest loans and matched savings accounts—along with financial education and asset-specific training—are viable strategies to promote the “full inclusion and integration [of individuals with disabilities] in the economic, political, social, cultural, and educational mainstream of society in the United States.” Public policy should be designed to support and expand the availability of such programs.
Just like every other American, people with disabilities deserve the opportunity to move out of poverty, build assets and to otherwise improve their financial capabilities. As noted by one of our IDA participants, “… I have disabilities but want to live an independent life without the help of the government. …I want to be free to make my choices and not be put down for who I am. …I do not want to be a drain, but rather give back to people…and make a real difference. My dream is to work to become independent on my own while giving back to the community. So, I am going to give back 25 cents of every dollar I make to 3 organizations, because I feel that it will help me, and inspire people everywhere, to become stronger and have a happier life.”
About the Authors Frances Pennell is the Executive Director of the Washington Access Fund, a nonprofit Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI). Previously, she worked as the Policy & Funding Specialist for the Washington Assistive Technology Alliance and as an attorney in private practice in Seattle and Chicago. Leann Wicklund developed and manages the Washington Access Fund’s Individual Development Account Programs. References Alper, S., & Raharinirina, S. (2006) Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21, 47-64.
Ball, P., Morris, M., Hartnette, J., & Blanck, P. (2006) Breaking the cycle of poverty: Asset accumulation by people with disabilities. Disability Studies Quarterly, 26(1).
Brault, M. (2012). Americans with disabilities: 2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
Carlson, D., & Ehrlich, N. (2006). Sources of payment for assistive technology: Findings from a national survey of persons with disabilities. Assistive Technology, 18, 77-86.
Fremstad, S. (2009). Half in ten: Why taking disability into account is essential to reducing income poverty and expanding economic inclusion. Washington, DC: Center for Economic and Policy Research.
Harris, K., & Weinberger-Divack, H. (2010). Accessible assets: Bringing together the disability and asset building communities. Clearinghouse Review, 44, 4-15.
Hartnett, J. T. (2008). Building a better economic future: A progress report for individuals with disabilities & their families in America. Manchester, NH: Community Economic Development Press.
Lombe, M., Huang, J., Putnam, M., & Cooney, K. (2010). Exploring saving performance in an IDA for people with disabilities: Some preliminary findings. Social Work Research, 24, 83-93.
National Assistive Technology Technical Assistance Project. (August, 2010) Access to telework program: Financing business equipment to increase employment of people with disabilities. Arlington, VA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.resnaprojects.org/AFTAP/telework/financingbusequip.pdf
National Organization on Disability. (2010). 2010 Harris poll survey of 1001 adults with disabilities and 788 adults without disabilities. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.2010DisabilitySurveys.org
Parish, S. L., Grinstein-Weiss, M., Yeo, Y. H., Rose, R. A., & Rimmerman, A. (2010). Assets and income: Disability-based disparities in the United States. Social Work Research, 34, 71-82.
Peiyun, S., & Livermore, G. A. (2006). Material hardship, poverty, and disability among working-age adults. Washington, DC: Cornell University Institute for Policy Research.
RESNA Catalyst Project. (April, 2012). A decade of making a difference: Financial loans for people with disabilities: Report on ten years of operation of the alternative financing programs for individuals with disabilities. Arlington, VA: Author. Retrieved from http://resnaprojects.org/documents/uploads/2012afp.pdf
RESNA Catalyst Project. (February, 2012). Access to telework program: Business equipment financial loans: Increasing employment of people with disabilities. Arlington, VA: Author. Retrieved from http://resnaprojects.org/documents/uploads/2012telework.pdf Meet Bob Plummer Robert Plummer is a designer, inventor, and active member of the community. Bob was a successful participant in the Washington Access Fund’s first IDA pilot project. When this first pilot project ended, he had additional items he wanted to purchase and had not yet reached the $4,000 cap, so he joined the Business Equipment IDA program. Bob purchased multiple items through the two IDA programs, including a large monitor and desktop computer system with a digital drafting table for his home estimating business.
Being part of the first IDA pilot project provided much-needed support for Bob’s estimating and design business for lumber companies. As he noted at the conclusion of the project, his new computer enables him to provide estimates at “lightning speed.” He said, “Without the Access Fund, I don’t think I could have been able to purchase the items I needed. Although the building market is slow, I am able to bring in new software to make my business grow stronger. Once I purchase a newer van, with the help of the Access Fund, I will be able to have much more freedom.”
Bob’s goal of getting a newer van recently became a reality thanks to his participation in the Business Equipment IDA and a low-interest Business Equipment loan. Bob emphasized, “Without the IDA program, it would have taken me years to get where I’m going. I like the fact that the Access Fund is out there for us, the IDA is an awesome program!” Bob also has been a big help as we continue to develop our matched savings program. He identified needed changes in the purchasing process and we subsequently incorporated his ideas into our new IDA programs.
You can find Bob riding one of his coolest inventions—an adapted bicycle called the “Two-Fun”—on trails near Seattle. To learn more, visit the following link: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/92145539.html
Meet Tyler Eckel Tyler Eckel has seen it all. Despite having limited vision, Tyler has what he calls a “mind’s eye.” This certainly comes in handy in his job for the past ten years. Tyler has worked at Qwest Field (now Century Link) since it first opened as Seahawk’s Stadium! He memorized a map of the stadium his first day on the job. As a greeter, Tyler sends people in the right direction to help them find their seats.
Tyler successfully participated in the Access Fund’s first IDA pilot project. When that project concluded, he enrolled in a Paul Allen Foundation IDA to meet his $4,000 savings goal. In the first project, he used his savings for dentures (essential for his job as a greeter and, of course, daily life!), mobility training in echolocation, and a CCTV (a powerful desktop magnifier used by individuals who are visually impaired to read, write, manage finances, read recipes and carry out many other tasks).
Ever since he started saving, Tyler has been hoping to find and purchase a handheld CCTV magnifier. For all of his years as a greeter, Tyler has had to ask people for their seat number and then tell them how to get there. With a handheld magnifier, he would be able to read the tickets himself. Tyler tested several options over the years until he recently found just the right device. He was able to purchase the device with his savings and the match. Tyler has many talents and broad experience in a variety of jobs and settings. He also works for the Seattle Lighthouse for the Blind. While he enjoys the jobs he has now, he knows that he is capable of so much more. He uses the wonderful analogy of a caterpillar that has not yet cocooned. Tyler would like to work within schools to teach students on how best to interact with a person with a disability, as well as to inspire students who themselves have disabilities. Tyler really enjoys helping people, whether it is assisting them to find their seat or teaching Braille to others. Assistive technology “is my sight connection,” says Tyler. Having used assistive technology most of his life, he knows just how valuable it is (and how expensive it can be!).
Future Assets for Independence By Allison Falleur & Joe Wykowski
Getting Started In 2010, Community Vision began exploration of creating an Individual Development Account program with a local non-profit partner, Community and Shelter Assistance of Oregon, CASA. Since asset building is a new area of exploration for individuals with disabilities, Community Vision hoped to work with partners who brought local community capacity to the table in terms of both funding and asset accumulation expertise. An integral piece to Community Vision’s efforts was finding ways to partner with community organizations already providing general services not based in the disability world.
Historically, individuals with disabilities have very few opportunities to create an asset that provides both financial equality and an opportunity to dream about one’s financial security. Structured correctly, Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) provide just that opportunity. IDAs are matched savings accounts that allow people on fixed, low incomes to multiply what they are able to budget and save (most commonly) at a ratio of three to one. The IDA accounts have the potential to lift individuals out of poverty and offer them economic stability and equality.
Many individuals with disabilities continue to live in poverty due to low cash entitlements from Social Security and limits on assets, which prohibit the accumulation of wealth and acquisition of assets. If people are to achieve movement toward asset accumulation, they may risk losing cash entitlements which are needed to mitigate the higher cost of living due to increased medical costs. Moreover, people with disabilities fear loss of medical insurance that provides access to both health care and support services in home and employment settings.
Due to the risks of losing needed support, asset-building strategies for people with disabilities are rarely addressed and have remained a largely undiscovered option. Through our current work, asset-building programs for people with disabilities are beginning to emerge in Oregon. The Social Security Administration has long acknowledged IDA accounts as one pathway towards financial stability and asset building. However, some policy questions remain on how to structure such programs so that an individual can maintain eligibility for health insurance and cash benefits while allowing funds to accrue to pay for the asset. Because of still lingering uncertainties, asset building for people with disabilities is a pioneering field often met with apprehension and misunderstanding by people with disabilities, their families, and support networks. Despite some enduring policy challenges, we have been energized by learning that when a person begins to accumulate financial assets, their thinking and expectations changes as they save toward a particular dream. Receiving and spending the same amount of income each month without a savings goal and the opportunity to save does little to achieve a personal dream.
“Future Assets for Independence” provides opportunities for individuals to save towards a first home purchase, home repairs or rehabilitation, small business development, or assistive technology. We have found the current uses of an IDA address the following challenges for individuals.
• Accessible public housing is a scarcity in Oregon and throughout the United States, fueling the need for people with disabilities to be able to live in and adapt homes of their own to fit their individual needs.
• In an economy with an 80% unemployment rate for people with developmental disabilities, starting a small business has proven to be very successful door to employment for individuals with disabilities because it allows for a vocation to be built around individual talents and strengths.
• With the advent of tablet computers, iPads, and other emerging devices, people with disabilities now have unprecedented access to new technologies for communication. This makes the IDA we offer for assistive technology a very exciting option for some individuals.
Community Vision has structured the IDA program specifically to recognize and address the unique challenges asset building presents for individuals with disabilities. Many IDAs are structured using matching federal funding with individual savings, exempting the accounts from consideration as a resource and thus excluding the funds from asset calculation within federal benefit programs, including social security and HUD rental subsidies.
Others who may want to access an IDA, but who do not have employment income, can qualify for a state-funded IDA. Acting as the third party, CASA of Oregon and Community Vision staff oversee the accounts and CASA will release funds directly to vendors providing the asset as directed by the individual. Members of Community Vision’s staff, charged with administering the IDAs, are trained on Social Security regulations, Medicaid and Medicare administrative rules, and veterans benefits so they understand the strict parameters in which they must work to make asset building a success for all individuals.
Dream Stories One of the most exciting parts of putting together a new asset building initiative—one rooted at the core of our vision—is our involvement in supporting individual dreams while planning one person at a time. Being able to support each person as they decide what their dream is and how to move forward in terms of savings and financial goals has been the starting point for each person opening an IDA. True change and excitement always occurs when each person is afforded the opportunity to look into the future and imagine how their business might flourish, how they might connect to a larger supportive community, how they can access needed technology, or how they might purchase a place to call home. Arlene Arlene Huggett had a talent that might have easily been overlooked. She had a keen eye for making colors explode on canvas in abstract ways that dazzled the mind. She just needed help to unlock her vision and the means to turn the artistic skill into a viable business venture. With help from her co- facilitator, Arlene’s inner genius was allowed to emerge. Having cerebral palsy is no barrier. Once she gets set up with the art supplies she needs, make way for visual poetry. Arlene’s work has garnered acclaim and recognition at various art shows and she has had multiple requests for the sale of her original works.
Arlene’s work sends a message to the world. She hopes that through her art she can speak to the immense potential of individuals with disabilities, potential that often goes unnoticed. Getting that message across is extremely important to Arlene. So much so that she has partnered with Portland Public Schools on a grade school curriculum that uses art to demonstrate how people with disabilities share more similarities than differences with others in the community. Through the curriculum, students will learn that any differences that present themselves are to be celebrated rather than feared. The easiest way to express this to grade school children may be through art because it gives children something to engage with and subtly drives the message home.
Arlene wanted to start a business, but living on Social Security income meant she did not have the means to invest the substantial amount of money needed for successful startup. This is why IDA match funds are so crucial to the realization of her dreams. With matching funds, what may once have been impossible is now within reach. Nearing completion of her IDA, she has now saved $4802. Arlene has also completed business classes at Mt. Hood Community College, which provided her a firm understanding of business operations. The IDA has helped her attain knowledge and resources that will ensure her success. Eight years ago, as Arlene began selling her paintings, her initial success planted the seed for the dream of starting a business. Arlene is using her IDA funds to rent a space in a fellow artist’s studio. This studio has pledged to become her platform by branding itself Creative Artworks by Arlene Huggett. Arlene anticipates her main product will be greeting cards. IDA funds will cover the cost for initial production of the cards. It will also allow her to rent booth space at various artisan fairs and sponsor a booth as part of Saturday Market to show to sell her cards and larger original pieces. Very proud of her success, Arlene hopes to showcase her work in studio at a small number of open houses throughout the summer and fall months. Located in the Pearl, her studio hopes to showcase her work at First Thursday events, a time when galleries and artists open their doors to the public.
To know Arlene is to know her passion for the art she creates. Arlene is very excited and ready (more than ready) to share her message of inclusion through art with the world. With the help of the IDA, the community will discover what Arlene has always known, that she is an artist of unparalleled talent.
Chris Chris Fernandez has always been clear about one thing—he has something important he wants to contribute to society. Chris has always been a hard worker, eager to earn a paycheck and be a taxpayer. He wants to get off of the Social Security benefits that he feels stigmatize him and limit him financially. He is motivated not just to be an employee, but to be a standout employee with a demonstrated work ethic and dedication to successful outcomes. However, Chris knew he needed to find his niche in order to succeed. When pressed to share what that niche might be, he surprised everyone by saying he wanted to start his own business cleaning houses.
Chris said he learned a passion for cleaning and attention to detail from his mother. Cleaning was such an ingrained task from his childhood that it seems that it would be a natural fit as a vocation. Living on Social Security with a limited income, Chris knew he would not have enough income to adequately provide the startup costs of his business. After he was presented with the idea of establishing an IDA to access additional resources through match funds, Chris’ Ecofriendly Cleaning business was born. Chris used his IDA account to buy supplies for his business and fund some advertising. He secured an initial client base of 8 customers, all of whom are very pleased by his level of professionalism and the thoroughness of his work. As Chris gets ready to graduate from the IDA program, he is pleased with the ease of the process and how invested people have been in helping him achieve his dream. He says he learned how to successfully budget money and the value of saving for a long-term goal. As he quickly points out, his dreams for the future are the same for everyone who works for a living. He wants to be able to live off of his hard earned income and hopefully one day have enough to fund his dream vacations.
Laura Laura Betnar has always dreamed of having her own home. The eight-plex in which she currently rents a unit can be noisy and is in some degree of disrepair. However, her main hurdle has been managing money. She has also faced substantial barriers when it comes to her credit. She was in debt and renting most of her furniture in a rent-to-own contract that provided what she needed but at high interest rates. Laura did not understand how to budget money in a way that benefited her in the long run. She did not see the value of saving for a future goal.
Laura did possess a desire to own her own home. She is passionate when describing her perfect home, from exterior paint colors to the flower boxes she envisions in the windows. Pairing that dream with the IDA program provided her with the incentive to learn money management and to learn to live within her means. Such lessons would unlock her dream of having her very own home. Laura and others in her life are very proud of how hard she has worked to stay within a budget and make changes to her life to be able to save for her home. With IDA match funds, the small amount Laura has been able to save is now enough for a down payment on a house, something she would have never been able to attain alone.
Laura worked very hard to attend evening financial courses in budgeting, money management and positive credit building. She is very proud of her graduation certificates and thrilled that she has been invited to speak at various conferences as an example of an IDA success. Laura has a very big heart and previously would loan people money if she could. But she now understands she needs to attend to her own financial needs first before helping others. Anyone who talks to Laura can see the difference immediately—she now speaks up when something is too expensive and would stretch her budget too far. Laura plans to purchase her home in November. She is excited to see the floor plan and show it to all who ask to see it. “I can’t believe it it’s finally happening. I worked very hard. Now I get a place of my own.”
Expanding Our Learning Community Vision has two years of direct experience assisting individuals to save and build assets. We initially began assisting individuals already receiving supports other through Community Vision. We have since expanded our efforts to assist others with disabilities outside of our individual support organization.
Individuals and families looking for an approach that builds upon dreams can look forward to IDAs as a conduit to fulfilling financial goals and individual aspirations. The process opens opportunities to facilitate small businesses start-up, to provide educational opportunities, (including work training), and to fulfill the dream of individual home ownership. Community Vision intends to continue its efforts of creating asset-building opportunities within the public at large for years to come.
We fully believe that to create a culture of change we must extend our efforts in order to generate common knowledge in the community that IDA’s are available to fulfill individual’s dreams. Pairing IDA’s with effective benefits counseling and personal trust planning is the way of the future for creating and protecting assets for individuals with disabilities. We look forward to a systematic shift, in which all people have the opportunity to accumulate savings and use assets to fund personal dreams. Community Vision assists individuals with disabilities to have what we all desire, a piece of the American dream.
About the Authors Joe Wykowski is the Director of Community Vision in Portland Oregon, a person centered organization- facilitating supports on behalf individuals and families. Joe also founded the Homeownership Empowerment Program, which assists 15 individuals or families a year to purchase a home and the Future Assets for Independence Program, which provides the opportunity for persons with disabilities to create asset-building accounts.
Allison Falleur is the Asset Programs Coordinator for Community Vision, Inc. She is also a Social Security certified benefits planner with 8 years of experience helping individuals with disabilities successfully navigate economic policies, programs and systems that influence their economic and societal standing, to promote stability and advancement.
Association News
TASH Hosts Successful Briefing on the Hill June 24, 2014 - The room was packed tight last Tuesday morning at TASH’s Congressional Briefing on restraint and seclusion. TASH in conjunction with ACLU, APRAIS, and the Congressional Black Caucus Education & Labor Taskforce, hosted over 80 attendees to build awareness about the dangers of restraint and seclusion in our nation’s schools.
To read more about the Congressional Briefing, click the link below. http://tash.org/tash-hosts-congressional-briefing-to-stoprs/
Registration Coming Soon for the 2014 TASH Conference! Washington, D.C. December 3-5, 2014
For nearly 40 years, the TASH Conference has impacted the disability field by connecting attendees to innovative information and resources, facilitating connections between stakeholders in the disability movement, and helping attendees reignite their passion for the full inclusion of people with disabilities in all aspects of community life.
This year’s theme, Be the Future, is inspired by the culture TASH has established in its aim to achieve equity, opportunity and inclusion for people with significant disabilities in all aspects of community life.
Registration is coming soon!
Call for Nominations | TASH Connections Editorial Board Deadline: August 1, 2014 or until Board is named
TASH Connections is now seeking nominations (including self-nominations) for members of the Editorial Board. Members of the TASH Connections Editorial Board are appointed to a terms of three years, with the possibility of renewal. TASH Connections is published 4 times a year by TASH.
To learn more about the responsibilities of the Editorial Board, click the link below. http://tash.org/call-for-nominations-tash-connections-editorial-board/
Welcome New TASH Chapters It is with great excitement that TASH announces new chapters in both Illinois and Wisconsin!
The need for inclusive community supports in Illinois is great, especially as individuals transition from high school. IL-TASH looks forward to working with members to enact change and advocate for "inclusive community transition". Click the link below to view the IL-TASH facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/TASHilchap2014
WI-TASH plans to partner strategically to increase individual and family advocacy and empowerment regarding inclusive schools and communities, maintaining equity in education by opposing special education vouchers and segregated settings, integrating the diverse cultural groups, and assisting the development of increasingly inclusive communities, jobs, schools and classrooms across the state. Click the link below to view the WI-TASH facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/groups/295634460509244/
Kentucky TASH Summer Retreat KY-TASH has scheduled its summer retreat for August 23, 2014 in Lexington. The board will meet to review what has been accomplished in 2014 and begin to plan goals and activities for 2015. Click the link below to read more. http://tash.org/get-involved/find-a-local-chapter/ky-tash/
2014 Think College Wisconsin Conference: Raising Expectations Friday, October 17, 2014, Cardinal Stritch University, Milwaukee, WI
The conference for everyone interested in post-secondary education for students with intellectual disabilities. The conference will engage: higher education and K-12 faculty, staff and administrators; individuals with intellectual disabilities and their families or caregivers. Participants will hear from one of the founders of the national Think College movement and network with other colleges and school districts in various stages of planning and implementation of college initiatives.
For more information about this event, please contact Beth Moss([email protected]) or click the link below. https://www.regonline.com/Register/Checkin.aspx?EventID=1557665
About TASH TASH is an international leader in disability advocacy. Founded in 1975, TASH advocates for human rights and inclusion for people with significant disabilities and support needs – those most vulnerable to segregation, abuse, neglect and institutionalization.
TASH works to advance inclusive communities through advocacy, research, professional development, policy, and information and resources for parents, families and self-advocates. The inclusive practices TASH validates through research have been shown to improve outcomes for all people.
Policy Statement It is TASH’s mission to eliminate physical and social obstacles that prevent equity, diversity and quality of life for children and adults with disabilities. Items in this newsletter do not necessarily reflect attitudes held by individual members of the Association as a whole. TASH reserves the right to exercise editorial judgment in selection of materials. All contributors and advertisers are asked to abide by the TASH policy on the use of people-first language that emphasizes the humanity of people with disabilities.
Terms such as “the mentally retarded,” “autistic children,” and “disabled individuals” refer to characteristics of individuals, not to individuals themselves. Terms such as “people with mental retardation,” “children with autism,” and “individuals who have disabilities” should be used. The appearance of an advertisement for a product or service does not imply TASH endorsement. For a copy of TASH’s publishing and advertising policy, please visit www.tash.org.
TASH Mission & Vision As a leader in disability advocacy for more than 35 years, the mission of TASH is to promote the full inclusion and participation of children and adults with significant disabilities in every aspect of their community, and to eliminate the social injustices that diminish human rights. These things are accomplished through collaboration among self-advocates, families, professionals, policy-makers, advocates and many others who seek to promote equity, opportunity and inclusion. Together, this mission is realized through:
• Advocacy for equity, opportunities, social justice and human rights • Education of the public, government officials, community leaders and service providers • Research that translates excellence to practice • Individualized, quality supports in place of congregate and segregated settings and services • Legislation, litigation and public policy consistent with the
The focus of TASH is supporting those people with significant disabilities and support needs who are most at risk for being excluded from society; perceived by traditional service systems as most challenging; most likely to have their rights abridged; most likely to be at risk for living, working, playing and learning in segregated environments; least likely to have the tools and opportunities necessary to advocate on their behalf; and are most likely to need ongoing, individualized supports to participate in inclusive communities and enjoy a quality of life similar to that available to all people.
TASH has a vision of a world in which people with disabilities are included and fully participating members of their communities, with no obstacles preventing equity, diversity and quality of life. TASH envisions communities in which no one is segregated and everyone belongs. This vision will be realized when:
• All individuals have a home, recreation, learning and employment opportunities • All children and youth are fully included in their neighborhood schools • There are no institutions • Higher education is accessible for all • Policy makers and administrators understand the struggles of people with disabilities and plan – through laws, policies and regulations – for their active participation in all aspects of life • All individuals have a way to communicate and theircommunities are flexible in communicating in alternate waysthat support full participation • Injustices and inequities in private and public sectors are eradicated • Practices for teaching, supporting and providing services topeople with disabilities are based on current, evidence-based strategies that promote high quality and full participation in all aspects of life • All individuals with disabilities enjoy individualized supports and a quality of life similar to that available to all people • All individuals with disabilities have the tools and opportunities to advocate on their behalf