On the Obama Disability Policy blog, I wrote about possible ways to make programs better. There are two sections: Social Security Administration and "One-Stop" Shop (instead of the run-around we have now).
SSA Transitional Ideas
Right now, a person is not able to make more then $100 per month, before taxes, without losing a portion of benefits. Nor can a person have more than $2000 in assets.
But what if....
* People received a stipend to help cover transportation: Another barrier as far as getting a job is that the money lost in benefits is more than one gains by having a job. Not only that, but you're actually
spending more to get to and from work. A set stipend would cover a portion of the extra cost while people transition to the workforce.
* The limit on income and saving was raised: The amount lost in benefits compared to the amount one can earn is insane. The limits have been the same year after year with no change to account for cost of living (which even SSI benefits reflect, though very marginally). The limit could begin at a set (reasonable) level, where you lost X amount of benefits, and then gradually increase as more money is earned. This system would also make it possible for people to maybe even save money to further help them get off the system.
* A waiver was available for needed assets: What if someone needed a car to get around? Public transportation is not a possibility for everyone. Some states don't have adequate paratransit services, some people with disabilities don't qualify because of stricter rules, and some who don't qualify aren't able to wait outside for regular bus service.
In many places, paratransit services offer a half hour window for pickup or drop off - 15 minutes before a person's "appointment time" and 15 after (and that's if they're on time, which isn't always the case). A trick many I know use is to say your appointment is an hour before you need to be somewhere; for an 11 AM appointment, for example, you say you need to be there at 10. This makes for an awfully long day, and some people with disabilities have to factor that into their schedule.
* Health insurance was never, ever lost: Right now a person will lose Medicaid once they earn a certain wage. No buy-in, no stopgap, nothing. What's worse is that a person's attendant care is tied to Medicaid. This also needs to be addressed as far as universal health care, because what's affordable to some isn't to others. Maybe the answer is a sliding scale buy-in based on income, I'm not sure. But when a person needs medicine to get through the day, taking that away is dangerous.
"One-Stop" Shop
I did some extra research tonight, research I should have done long ago honestly. But the new information I found – not really new, but more detailed – wouldn’t do anything as far as wading through the system. These details are ones I sought in an effort to come up with an idea of how – and how difficult – it would be to formulate a "one-stop shop" for disability services.
I only talk about the services I personally know of: Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, Division of Developmental Disabilities, and Department of Social and Health Services. I’m unfamiliar with Department of Services for the Blind, which exists in my state as separate from Social and Health Services (not sure if this is the case everywhere).
First would be to remove PCA (personal care attendant) services from under the realm of Medicaid. As I’ve said before, a loss of Medicaid means a loss of PCA services. So even if a person chose to get a job and forsake medical care, the need of the most minute outside help would keep them back. Personal care services should not fall under the guise of medical care as far as the government is concerned.
On the organizational side, establish an Office of Disability Services. Under that heading could be divisions relating to employment (vocational services and rehabilitation - because if you’re 18 and going for a first job, what exactly are they "rehabbing"?), educational services (that, honestly, could begin at age 16 and offer services to help with the transition from high school), independent living services (which would house respite, PCA, help navigating Section 8 housing, assisted living placement, etc), and financial (which would work directly with SSA to help those receiving SSI and possibly SSDI [or both]).
My only experience to go by is my own. This, however, would foster a pool of resources so they weren’t so difficult to navigate as well as make it more unlikely for someone to fall through the cracks. More importantly, it would better serve households with more than one disabled person. A friend of mine recently told me that, according to DSHS, her and her disabled sister are "one person" – in the files, it’s literally one folder that uses my friend's first name, her sister’s name, then their last name. Records from DVR and DDD for both people go in the same folder, and all income-based eligibility programs consider their shared income "one income". By this system, they’re denied food stamps and other programs that are the right of every American in need. This not only needs to be fixed, this should be illegal.