executive summary - cornell university · web viewfamily situation other than child care...

BPAO Survey

Social Security Administration’sOffice of Employment Support Programs

Benefits Planning Assistance and Outreach (BPAO) 2004 Customer Satisfaction Survey Results

BPAO Survey

Executive Summary

The Benefits Planning, Assistance and Outreach (BPAO) Survey was conducted at the request of the Office of Employment Support Programs to obtain feedback about the experience and opinions of BPAO program participants. Under 116 cooperative agreements with a variety of community organizations nationwide, specially trained benefits specialists provide different levels of counseling services to assist disabled beneficiaries in making informed decisions about work, including the three most intensive categories of services: Benefits Analysis and Advisement, Benefits Support Planning and Benefits Management. The BPAO survey was conducted by telephone during November and December 2002 with 1,764 individuals who were identified as having received 1 of these levels of service.

Using SSA’s standard six-point rating scale that ranges from “excellent” to “very poor,” beneficiaries were asked to evaluate their overall satisfaction with the information and services provided, as well as the more tangible aspects of the experience such as the convenience, accessibility and privacy of the location where they met with the benefits specialists. Beneficiaries also provided their level of satisfaction (“very satisfied” to “very dissatisfied”) with access to the benefits specialist, both in person and by telephone. The clarity and helpfulness of the information and actions of the benefits specialists were assessed using a four-point scale from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” And, finally, the survey also contained questions about the participant’s work activity and education.

Highlights of the survey results follow:

Survey respondents reported a very positive reaction to BPAO counseling giving an overall satisfaction rate of 89 percent excellent, very good or good (E/VG/G). Among dissatisfied respondents, specific complaints were that the benefits specialists could not provide complete and accurate information, that they failed to return calls promptly and that the program had not provided tangible help in terms of finding employment.

At 96 percent E/VG/G, the courtesy of the benefits specialist was most highly rated, followed by the time they spent with the participant (94 percent E/VG/G) and their helpfulness (90 percent E/VG/G).

When considering their in-person contacts with the benefits specialist, the privacy and accessibility of the meeting location both received E/VG/G ratings of 93 percent. In contrast, the convenience of the meeting location was one of the lowest rated aspects of service (84 percent E/VG/G) because of the long distance respondents had to travel, the lack of transportation and inadequate parking.

Ninety-five percent of respondents reported that they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied (VS/SS) with the length of time they waited for their initial appointment with the benefits specialist. Although still highly favorable, satisfaction was lower for respondents trying to get through to the benefits specialist on the telephone (90 percent VS/SS) or waiting for a return call (89 percent VS/SS).

ii

BPAO Survey

Respondents were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with several statements concerning different aspects of the services provided by the benefits specialist. Ninety-five percent of respondents strongly agreed or somewhat agreed (SA/SWA) (77 percent SA) that it was helpful when the benefits specialist contacted someone else about their situation, such as a friend, relative, SSA or Vocational Rehabilitation. Only 43 percent of respondents reported that the benefits specialist took such an action during the course of their counseling.

Sixty-one percent of respondents indicated that the benefits specialist wrote something for them that explained their personal situation and benefits. Of this group, a very high percentage (95 percent SA/SWA; 70 percent SA) found that this written explanation clearly told them what they needed to know.

When respondents considered the oral explanations they received from the benefits specialist, most (92 percent SA/SWA; 65 percent SA) found the information about how work and earnings would affect their benefits to be clear. Some of the respondents who disagreed claimed that they had never received an explanation from the benefits specialist.

Respondents reported the lowest level of agreement (87 percent SA/SWA; 56 percent SA) with the statement that, after talking with the benefits specialist, they understood what they were supposed to do or what was supposed to happen next. Respondents who did not agree said that the benefits specialist’s explanation left them feeling confused and uncertain about the next step in the process.

Similar proportions of respondents agreed that they were confident the benefits specialist provided them with accurate information (94 percent SA/SWA; 72 percent SA) and that they took actions promptly (94 percent SA/SWA; 75 percent SA).

Twenty-eight percent of respondents indicated that they were working at the time of their initial contact with the benefits specialist. After benefits counseling, 47 percent of respondents reported work activity (26 percent continued work that had started before their contact; 21 percent began working subsequent to benefits counseling).

Three-fourths of respondents felt there were other issues in their life that affected their decision about working besides the information they obtained through benefits counseling. The two other factors most frequently cited by respondents were their medical condition (53 percent) followed by their family situation (17 percent).

ii

BPAO Survey

Report on Benefits Planning, Assistance and Outreach (BPAO) Survey

Background

SSA, as authorized by the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999, awarded 116 cooperative agreements nationwide to a variety of community organizations under the auspices of the BPAO program. The goal of these projects is to better enable SSA’s beneficiaries with disabilities to make informed choices about work. The program offers beneficiaries services in five distinct categories, ranging in intensity from providing basic information to assisting beneficiaries in developing and carrying out long-term support plans.

Each BPAO Project conducts an extensive outreach program in their area to identify beneficiaries who might be eligible for their services; e.g., at health fairs or clinics. SSA does not provide any lists regarding current beneficiaries but may make referrals to the local BPAO Project. The beneficiaries are given counseling by benefits specialists during one or more contacts. These contacts may take place on the telephone or in person. The effect of their work activity is discussed, and the ramifications of this work on their benefits are explained. Benefits specialists may contact third parties on behalf of beneficiaries to verify information or to assist beneficiaries in carrying out the actions required of them.

The Office of Employment Support Programs (OESP) requested that the Office of Quality Assurance and Performance Assessment (OQA) conduct a survey to assess beneficiaries’ experiences and opinions of the services provided by the BPAO organizations.

Methodology

Sample Selection

The survey sample was selected from the BPAO data system maintained by the Virginia Commonwealth University. This system consolidates inputs from the 116 BPAO Program providers regarding beneficiary contacts. Sample selection focused on individuals receiving the three most intensive categories of services provided by BPAO projects:

- Benefits Analysis and Advisement is based on a thorough review of the comprehensive information gathered for the beneficiary/recipient. The benefits specialist assesses the real or potential impacts of employment and/or other changes on the person’s Federal and State benefit programs and overall financial well being.

- Benefits Support Planning provides direct assistance to beneficiaries/recipients in the development of a comprehensive, long-term plan to guide the effective monitoring and management of the individual’s Federal and State benefit programs and work incentives.

- Benefits Management services helps beneficiaries design, implement, monitor and evaluate the outcome of a long-term support plan.

BPAO Survey

The sample universe consisted of individuals receiving services in these three categories between October 2001 and August 2002. A total of 8,226 records were identified where a valid name and address was available on the master beneficiary record (MBR) or supplemental security record (SSR). A random sample of 2,982 participants was selected from these records.

All sampled individuals received a written prenotification letter advising them that they had been selected for the survey and encouraging their participation. Shortly after receipt of the letter, sampled individuals were contacted by professional telephone interviewers from a private survey research firm engaged under a contract with SSA.

Response Rate

The survey was conducted by telephone in November 2002 – December 2002. A total of 1,764 interviews were completed. Respondents were excluded from the survey if they could not be contacted (e.g., telephone out of service, respondent not known at the telephone number on the MBR/SSR) or if they were unable to participate (e.g., due to physical or mental problems). After applying all exclusions, the survey response rate was a very high 80 percent. Tab A contains various demographic data describing the 1,764 survey respondents.

Questionnaire

The survey questionnaire, developed with the assistance of OESP, asked each beneficiary to rate their overall satisfaction with the information and services provided under the BPAO program using SSA’s standard six-point rating scale that ranges from “excellent” to “very poor.” Also, using the same scale, beneficiaries evaluated the more tangible aspects of the service such as convenience of the location where they met with the benefits specialist, its accommodations for the disabled, as well as the privacy provided.

Using a four-point satisfaction scale (“very satisfied” to “very dissatisfied”), beneficiaries provided their level of satisfaction with access to the benefits specialists, both in person and by telephone. The questionnaire also used a four-point scale from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree” to assess the clarity of the information provided and the helpfulness of the actions taken by the benefits specialists on behalf of the beneficiary.

Questions concerning the respondent’s work activity and educational background comprised the final section of the survey form. As part of the survey interview, respondents were given the opportunity to explain the reasons behind their dissatisfaction with service and to provide general comments about the program.

Presentation of Results

An overview of the findings of the survey follows. Tab B contains a survey questionnaire annotated with the percentage of responses for each question and the actual number of responders. Not all questions applied to every respondent, and some respondents failed to

2

BPAO Survey

answer all applicable questions. Therefore, the percentages shown reflect the proportion of those who answered each question, unless otherwise indicated.

Where differences in findings are described as “significant,” it means “statistically significant at the 95-percent confidence level.” Typical narrative comments recorded for respondents (displayed in italics) accompany the discussion of the related statistical data. Tab C provides a table for estimating sampling variability for findings presented in the report.

Findings

Recall of the Services Received

Seventy percent of the beneficiaries who participated in the survey initially remembered receiving benefits counseling under the BPAO program. After the 30 percent of respondents who did not remember receiving benefits counseling were given a more detailed explanation of the program, almost one-third were then able to recall the experience. Overall, therefore, 21 percent of the individuals contacted for the survey were unable to complete it because they did not recall the BPAO interaction. These respondents’ poor recall may be attributed to several factors: 1) The elapsed time since services were received (date of initial contact with the BPAO provider recorded as early as October 2001); 2) the short amount of time spent with the benefits specialist (12 percent of respondents received less than 1 hour of counseling); and 3) diminished recall due to their medical condition or medication.

How Participants Learned About BPAO

Thirty-three percent of the beneficiaries who responded said they were informed about the benefits counseling by a social worker, lawyer or other professional. The next largest group (27 percent) learned about the service in an outreach effort undertaken by the BPAO providers themselves. Other respondents indicated that they were told about the program by a Social Security employee (13 percent) or a friend or relative (10 percent). Remaining responses were distributed among a variety of miscellaneous sources.

Access to the Benefits specialist

Almost all respondents (95 percent) said they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied (VS/SS) with how soon a benefits specialist was available to speak to them. The few respondents who were unhappy with the time they had to wait simply stated that it took too long, giving specific timeframes ranging from only a week to several months.

“It took too long for them to contact me and set up appointments.”

Fifty percent of survey respondents interacted with the benefits specialists both by telephone and in person. Thirty-eight percent only had face-to-face contacts, and a small percentage (12 percent) solely dealt with the benefits specialists via telephone.

3

BPAO Survey

Telephone Contacts

A little more than three-quarters of respondents attempted to reach the benefits specialists on the telephone. The vast majority (90 percent) were VS/SS with the time it took to get through. Dissatisfied respondents complained that the lines were busy, the benefits specialists were often out of the office or that only their voice mail was available.

“Because they wouldn’t answer the phone – too difficult to get through.”“She was always out of her office or wasn’t available.”

Eighty-three percent of respondents reported that they had left a message asking the benefits specialists to call them back, with 75 percent indicating that the benefits specialist returned their call by the next day. This quick response time was reflected in respondents’ high level of satisfaction with elapsed time to receive a callback, 89 percent VS/SS. Respondents expressed dissatisfaction if they felt it took too long for the benefits specialist to return their call or if they were never called back.

“Because sometimes I would forget what I was going to talk to them about because it took too long.”“She never called back and I don’t like leaving messages that are never returned.”

As illustrated in the table below, the level of satisfaction with the time to receive a callback was perfect or near perfect if the benefits specialist returned the call on the same or following day. On the other hand, VS/SS ratings dropped dramatically if it took more than 2 days for the benefits specialist to return the call.

Callback ReceivedPercent of

RespondentsSatisfaction With Time

toReceive Callback

Same day 42% 100%Next day 33 992 days later 12 871

More than 2 days 10 381

Never called back 3 61

1Statistically significant decline from prior rating

In - Person Contacts

When respondents met with the benefits specialist in person, 58 percent reported they usually met at the benefits specialist’s office, while 28 percent used another location. A small proportion of respondents (14 percent) indicated that the benefits specialist actually visited their home.

When asked to rate the convenience of the location outside the home where they usually spoke with the benefits specialist, 84 percent of respondents rated it as excellent, very good or good (E/VG/G). Among the few respondents who complained, the long trip to the office was the main reason for their dissatisfaction. Others commented about the

4

BPAO Survey

unavailability of transportation as well as the lack of convenient parking at the meeting sites. This E/VG/G rating, although very good, is one of the lowest obtained in the survey. However, it is not surprising considering the large geographic areas covered by some of the BPAO providers.

“Because I had to travel 30 miles one way from home.”“Had to have special transportation which he had to pay for.”“Parking was poor, only one handicapped parking space.”

The vast majority of respondents (93 percent) rated the accessibility of the building where they usually met with the benefits specialist as E/VG/G. The main complaints among the few who rated accessibility fair, poor or very poor (F/P/VP) focused on the lack of wheelchair ramps, automatic doors or elevators. These comments are unexpected considering that the program targets a disabled population.

“They only had one entrance and they didn’t have anything but stairs.”“Need automatic doors for the handicapped.”

Ninety-three percent of beneficiaries rated the privacy of their meeting place with the benefits specialist as E/VG/G. Some respondents disliked meeting in public places where everyone could hear their personal conversations. Others were unhappy discussing their situation in a group environment and would have preferred to meet with the benefits specialist on a one-on-one basis.

“It wasn’t very private because it was at the library.”“There were people next to us and they could see and hear our conversation and we could hear theirs.”

Satisfaction with the Benefits Specialist’s Attributes

Seventy-two percent of respondents reported they had contact with only one benefits specialist during their counseling experience. When asked to rate the courtesy of the specific benefits specialist(s) they dealt with, almost all respondents were highly satisfied, giving a rating of 96 percent E/VG/G. Among the few respondents who offered negative remarks, the main reason cited was a poor or disinterested attitude on the part of the benefits specialist.

“Interrupted me when I was trying to ask specific questions –instead gave me information I didn’t really need - acted as if she didn’t want to be there.”“She treated me like I didn’t have a brain. She treated me very disrespectful and like I wasn’t a human being.”

5

BPAO Survey

The helpfulness of the benefits specialists also garnered high ratings, with 90 percent of respondents considering it E/VG/G. Most of the respondents who gave F/P/VP ratings felt that they did not get the help they expected or needed. Others complained that the benefits specialists could not answer their questions or that their explanations were incomplete or unclear.

“They said things to pump you up and never followed through.”“She just didn’t tell me anything I didn’t know and what she did say was complicated.”

A similarly high 94 percent of respondents thought the amount of time the benefits specialists spent with them was E/VG/G. A small number of dissatisfied respondents remarked that the benefits specialists seemed to rush through their interview, sometimes to accommodate another appointment. Other respondents felt that the few, short contacts they had were not very helpful.

“Because she had another appointment she had to get to in another county.”“Just one meeting – didn’t see them again.”“Not enough time – did not go over things and explain so I could understand – I felt kind of rushed.”

Clarity of explanation/information provided

Respondents were asked to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with several statements concerning the accuracy and clarity of the information they received from the benefits specialist.

Ninety-four percent of respondents strongly agreed or somewhat agreed (SA/SWA) that they felt confident that the information the benefits specialists gave them was correct, with 72 percent strongly agreeing with this statement. A small percentage disagreed because they later found that some of the information they were given by the benefits specialist was incorrect or because the benefits specialist was unable to answer their questions.

“Because I’m not finding what she said to be true as I go along.”“Because she was not certain of herself. She was confused.”

A very large proportion of respondents (92 percent SA/SWA; 65 percent SA) felt the benefits specialists clearly explained how working and earning money would affect their cash benefits, medical insurance and other types of assistance. The main reason some respondents disagreed was because they had never received this explanation. Some of those who had received an explanation thought it was incomplete or unclear.

“Nothing was ever explained to me and I never got anything back.”“Was not explained as clear as it should be.”

After talking with the benefits specialists, fewer respondents (87 percent SA/SWA) felt that they knew what they were supposed to do or what was supposed to happen next. At 56 percent, the proportion of respondents who strongly agreed with this statement was much

6

BPAO Survey

lower than for the other issues rated. Respondents who did not agree said the benefits specialist’s explanation left them feeling very confused and uncertain about the next step in the process.

“Had difficulty knowing how could put information to use.”“Confusing – didn’t know exactly what to do – I am poorly educated.”

Slightly more than 60 percent of respondents reported that the benefits specialist wrote something for them that explained their personal situation and their benefits. Of this group, a very high percentage (95 percent SA/SWA; 70 percent SA) found that the written explanation the benefits specialist gave them clearly told them what they needed to know. Respondents who did not think the written material was helpful most often indicated that they did not understand what they had read. Others felt the written explanations contained some incorrect or contradictory information.

“Did not understand it and needed to meet again for explanation.”“Because what he tells me is different from what Social Security tells me.”

Helpfulness of Actions

Respondents were also asked to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with several statements concerning the usefulness and timeliness of the actions the benefits specialists took on their behalf.

Forty-three percent of respondents stated that the benefits specialist contacted someone else on their behalf, such as a friend or relative, the Social Security office or Vocational Rehabilitation. A large majority (95 percent SA/SWA) agreed that the benefits specialist’s actions were helpful, with 77 percent strongly agreeing. Most of the small group of respondents who disagreed reported that the benefits specialist’s actions did not get them what they needed, but this was not necessarily viewed as the fault of the benefits specialist.

“I did not think it was helpful because she didn’t get the information she needed.”“I didn’t think it helped – I think it made it worse and it wasn’t the specialist…”

Most respondents (82 percent) indicated they received written material from the benefits specialist, such as pamphlets, booklets or fact sheets, with information about working and disability benefits. While the majority (92 percent SA/SWA) agreed that the pamphlets and booklets they received helped them to understand how working affects their benefits, a comparatively smaller proportion (59 percent) strongly agreed with this statement. A few respondents felt the various written materials were confusing and hard to understand. Others felt the information was too general and needed to be more specific to their individual needs.

“The information was a photocopy page out of the Social Security manual written for counselors, not the lay reader.”“Because the pamphlets are general statements and sometimes don’t apply to your problem.”

7

BPAO Survey

Timeliness of Actions

When the benefits specialist had to take some action on their case, for example, send them something in the mail or make a phone call for them, most respondents (94 percent SA/SWA; 75 percent SA) felt that they acted promptly. The few dissenting respondents remarked that the benefits specialist had not acted quickly or had not provided assistance when needed.

“Because she took a long time to respond to the problem and made it seem like it wasn’t an important issue.”“I had to make the calls for myself. I had to do the foot work myself.”

Overall Satisfaction

Survey respondents reported a very positive reaction to BPAO counseling giving an overall satisfaction rate of 89 percent E/VG/G. A number of dissatisfied respondents felt that the benefits specialists were not knowledgeable, either because they did not answer the respondents’ questions or because the information they provided was incorrect Another complaint was that the benefits specialist failed to return calls or did not return them promptly. And, finally, some respondents were unhappy because the program did not help them, particularly with finding employment.

“Because the rep didn’t know any answers to her questions.”“They were giving out wrong information.”“I could never get through and I never heard back from them.”“Because she was under the impression they was going to find her a job. The only thing they did was send her a pamphlet and she already had that information.”

Influences on Overall Satisfaction

Prior OQA surveys of disabled beneficiaries have shown that when access to the service provider, employee behavior, clarity of explanations and timeliness are poorly rated, overall satisfaction with service declines. This pattern was also evident among BPAO survey respondents as discussed below.

Access to Service

Although, as noted earlier, the vast majority of respondents were satisfied with how quickly they were able to arrange their initial contact with the benefits specialist, the few

8

BPAO Survey

dissatisfied respondents gave significantly lower E/VG/G ratings to the BPAO services overall. The chart below depicts the 53 percentage point decline.

Wait to Initial Contact Rated:Percent of

RespondentsE/VG/G Ratings of

BPAO Services OverallVery satisfied/somewhat satisfied 95% 92%

Somewhat dissatisfied/very dissatisfied 5 391

1Statistically significant decline

Telephone Service

Overall ratings of E/VG/G fell by 45 percentage points for respondents who were dissatisfied with the time it took them to get through to the benefits specialist on the telephone. A similar decline in overall ratings was seen (48 percentage points) when the respondents gave unsatisfactory ratings to the time it took the benefits specialist to call them back.

Aspects of Phone Service Percent of


BPAO Services OverallGetting through to benefits specialist rated:

Very satisfied/somewhat satisfied 90% 93%Somewhat dissatisfied/very

dissatisfied10 481

Wait for return call rated:Very satisfied/somewhat satisfied 89% 95%Somewhat dissatisfied/very

dissatisfied11 471


The table below shows the gradual decline in overall satisfaction that occurred as the number of days to receive a return call from the benefits specialist increased.

Elapsed Time to Receive CallbackPercent of


BPAO Services OverallSame day 42% 96%Next day 33 952 days later 12 821

More than 2 days 10 691

Never called back 3 351

1Statistically significant decline from prior rating

In-Person Service

For in-person service, low ratings of convenience, accessibility and privacy at the meeting location also had a negative impact on respondents’ overall impression of the BPAO counseling services, although not to the same extent as poor perceptions of access by telephone. As shown in the table below, E/VG/G overall ratings

9

BPAO Survey

dropped by 16 to 25 percentage points when one of these aspects of in-person service was rated F/P/VP.

8

BPAO Survey

Aspect of In-Person ServicePercent of


BPAO Services OverallConvenience of location rated:

Excellent/very good/good

84% 92%

Fair/poor/very poor 16 761

Accessibility for disabled rated:Excellent/very

good/good 93% 91%


Privacy rated:Excellent/very

good/good 93% 91%



Employee Attributes

Respondents who were satisfied with the courtesy, helpfulness and time spent by the benefits specialist gave overall satisfaction ratings of 92 percent or above, significantly higher than the overall rating of 89 percent for all respondents combined. In contrast, overall satisfaction dropped dramatically by more than 60 percentage points when employee attributes were rated only F/P/VP.

Employee AttributesPercent of


BPAO Services OverallCourtesy rated:

Excellent/very good/good

96% 92%


Helpfulness rated:Excellent/very

good/good 90% 95%


Time spent rated:Excellent/very

good/good 94% 93%



In addition, E/VG/G overall ratings were 60 percentage points higher when respondents felt confident that the information they received from the benefits specialist was correct.

Confident that Information AccuratePercent of


BPAO Services OverallStrongly agree/somewhat agree 94% 93%Somewhat disagree/strongly

disagree 6 331


10

BPAO Survey

Clarity of Explanations/Written Material

When respondents did not feel that the oral explanations they received were clear and helpful, E/VG/G ratings of overall service were between 37 and 46 percentage points lower. Similar opinions about written materials, both those personally prepared by

8

BPAO Survey

the benefits specialist as well as informational pamphlets, had the same negative impact on satisfaction as noted in the table below.

Benefits Specialists ActionsPercent of


BPAO Services OverallExplanation of working and earnings was clear:

Strongly agree/somewhat agree 91% 93%Somewhat disagree/strongly disagree

Knew what to do next: 9 471


Written explanations were clear:13 571


Pamphlets and booklets were helpful: 5 511

Strongly agree/somewhat agree 92% 95%Somewhat disagree/strongly disagree 8 611


Timeliness

When respondents agreed that the benefits specialist’s actions were taken promptly, their overall satisfaction ratings soared to 96 percent E/VG/G. In sharp contrast, E/VG/G overall service ratings were 53 percentage points lower among respondents who disagreed with this statement.

Actions Taken TimelyPercent of


BPAO Services OverallStrongly agree/somewhat agree 94% 96%Somewhat disagree/strongly

disagree 6 431


Work Activity

Twenty-eight percent of all respondents indicated that they were working at the time of their initial contact with the benefits specialist. Among those working, 22 percent were working on a full-time basis; i.e., 30 hours or more per week, while the majority (78 percent) worked part-time. When asked how the information the benefits specialists gave them affected their decision to continue working, 81 percent of these respondents said they kept working at the same rate or increased the number of hours they worked, while 19 percent decreased their work hours and 8 percent stopped working altogether. In other words, 26 percent of all respondents continued to work subsequent to benefits counseling.

When the same question was posed to the 72 percent of respondents who were not working at the time they received benefits counseling, almost one-third (31 percent) reported they had started working, either full (5 percent) or part-time (26 percent), after speaking to the benefits specialist. These new workers comprised 21 percent of all survey respondents.

11

BPAO Survey

Overall, respondents’ recollection of work activity indicated that benefits counseling had a positive impact. Considering both respondents who were working at the time they received benefits counseling and those who were not, altogether, 47 percent of those surveyed reported engaging in work activity subsequent to their contact with the BPAO provider.

By the time the survey was conducted, work activity had changed somewhat, with 42 percent of respondents indicating they were currently employed. The proportions of full-time (20 percent) and part-time (80 percent) workers were nearly the same as among those who were working prior to receiving benefits counseling.

Three-fourths of respondents felt there were other issues in their life that affected their decision about working besides the information they obtained through benefits counseling. The two other factors most frequently cited by respondents were their medical condition (53 percent) followed by their family situation (17 percent).

Comparison of Work Before and After Counseling

Respondents Working When Counseling Received

The table below shows that, after receiving benefits counseling, 17 percent of those respondents originally working fewer than 30 hours a week increased their hours, while 18 percent reduced their hours or stopped altogether.

Among the respondents who were working more than 30 hours a week, only 4 percent said they decided to work more; 21 percent said they reduced their hours or stopped working entirely after receiving benefits counseling. (Because of the small number of respondents, none of the differences between the part-time and full-time groups were statistically significant.)

Decision About Work Was:

Responders’ Work Schedule When Benefits Counseling Received

Full-time Part-timeWork at same rate 75% 65%Increase hours 4 17Decrease hours 10 10Stop working 11 8

Seven percent of respondents who were working part-time when counseling was received had increased to full-time status as of the date of the survey; 22 percent were no longer working. Among the full-time workers, 19 percent had decreased to part-time, while 30 percent had stopped altogether. Significantly more of those respondents originally employed part-time were able to maintain the same rate of work (71 percent) compared to those who were working full-time (52 percent).

12

BPAO Survey

Working at Time of Survey?

Respondents’ Work Schedule When Benefits Counseling Received

Full-time Part-timeYes, part-time 19% 71%Yes, full-time 52 7No 30 22

Respondents Not Working When Counseling Received

For the most part, respondents’ actions sustained the decision they made about working after receiving counseling. Almost all (90 percent) of those who said they remained unemployed after counseling were not working at the time of the survey. The majority of those who started to work in response to the BPAO counseling were working at the same rate they first indicated, 80 percent for respondents who were working full-time and 69 percent for those who began part-time employment. Among those who changed their work pattern, most stopped working or reduced their hours. Note that, because a considerable time may have elapsed between the date the benefits counseling was received and the date the survey interview took place, the respondents’ recall of their reaction to the counseling services may have been colored by their present circumstances.

Working at Time of Survey?

For Responders Not Working When Benefits Counseling Received,

Decision Was To:Remain Unemployed Start Working Part-time Start Working Full-time

Yes, part-time 7% 69% 4%Yes, full-time 2 2 80No 90 29 16

General Comments About Benefits Counseling Services

The final question on the survey form gave the respondents the opportunity to provide general comments about the information and services they received through the benefits counseling program. The number of positive remarks outweighed the negative remarks by a 2 to 1 margin. Respondents frequently praised the helpfulness of the program and the excellent treatment they received from the benefits specialists.

“I am very glad that they are there and they are very accurate with their information. I feel confident that the information that the people gave me was accurate. I wish I would have known about them before.”“I think it is a good program and hope they continue it.”“She was very good at explaining things so I could understand them and she was very helpful.”

13

BPAO Survey

The negative comments covered a wide variety of issues. Some respondents did not feel that the program was personally useful, particularly where they expected to receive help finding a job. Others wanted easier access to the benefits specialist and more frequent contacts, including followups after they began working. A few respondents made specific concrete suggestions such as closer, more accessible meeting locations, help with transportation and written material in large print or Braille format.

“It didn’t seem I was given any real help…”“Very frustrating that so little help in finding a job.”“I’d like to be able to get a hold of him on the phone, he never answers the phone.”“They needed to follow up after you get into the program.”“Need a specialist in every county; have central person in each office so disabled would not have to travel so far.”

14

Tab A

BPAO Responders Demographic Data

Gender Female

Male 49%

51

Type of Beneficiary Disabled Wage Earner (HA)Aged Adult (AI)

Disabled Blind/Child (DC/BC)Blind Adult (BI)Disabled Adult Child (DAC)Disabled Adult (DI)ESRD/Medicare only

78% 0 4 1<117<1

Number With Payees Own Payee

Representative Payee 82%

18

LanguageEnglishSpanish Portuguese

98% 2<1

EducationNot a high school graduateHigh school graduate or equivalent (GED)Some collegeTrade/technical or vocational schoolCollege graduate1

Postgraduate work or degree

12%3623 516 9

Type of BPAO Counseling Services Received 2 Received benefits analysis and advisement Received benefits support planning Received benefits management

95%3210

1 According to the 2000 census, 23 percent of the U.S. population age 18 or older have a bachelor’s degree or higher, indicating that BPAO respondents closely mirror the educational level of the general population.2 Total does not equal 100 percent because an individual may have received more than one level of service.

A-1

BPAO Responders Demographic Data

Total Hours of BPAO Counseling Services Received Less than 1 hour 1 hour2 hours3 hours4 hours5-9 hours10 or more hoursNone recorded

12%1421171119 6<1

Primary DisabilityBlind or visual impairmentHearing, speech or other sensory impairmentSpinal cord injuryNon-spinal cord orthopedic disability or amputationMental and emotional disorderCognitive disabilitiesSystem diseasesTraumatic brain injuryInfectious DiseaseInjuryCancer/neoplasmOtherUnknown

6% 2 613331019 6 2<1<1 2<1

A-2

Tab B

Benefits Planning, Assistance and Outreach (BPAO) SurveyAnnotated Survey Form

The number of respondents to each question is shown in brackets.

1. Do you remember getting benefits counseling (that is, talking to someone about how work and earnings affect your benefits)? {1,764}

70%30

Yes (Skip to 3)No

2. Social Security records show that you received benefits counseling from a benefits specialist working for (site name). The benefits specialist doesn’t work for Social Security but knows all their rules so they can help people who get Social Security benefits and who might want to work. The benefits specialist’s job is to explain to you what happens to your cash benefits, medical insurance and other types of assistance if you work and earn money. Do you remember talking with someone about this? {527}

29%71

Yes No (Survey ends here for these respondents.)

3. How did you learn about the benefits counseling services provided by (site name)? {1,391 responders gave 1,427 responses}

27% 3 6101333 2 6

Someone from BPAO site or another organization gave a talkSaw a sign or ad in the Social Security officeSaw/heard an ad or sign somewhere else; e.g., on the radio, on the bus, in a local clinicWas told about it by a friend or relativeWas told about it by a Social Security employeeWas told about it by a social worker, lawyer or other professionalGot an unsolicited call from the benefits specialist (Skip to 5)Other

B-1

4. When you first contacted (site) about receiving services from them, how satisfied were you with how soon a benefits specialist was available to talk to you? Were you: {1,341}

73%2295 2 3 5

Very satisfied Somewhat satisfiedVery satisfied/somewhat satisfiedSomewhat dissatisfied (Explain)Very dissatisfied (Explain)Somewhat dissatisfied/very dissatisfied (Explain)

5. Did you talk to the benefits specialist face-to-face, on the telephone or both? {1,360}

38%1250

Face-to-face onlyTelephone only (Skip to 10)Both

6. Where did you usually meet with the benefits specialist? {1,182}

58%2814

At their officeSome other location outside my homeIn my home (Skip to 10)

7. Considering things like transportation, parking and the distance from your home, how would you rate the convenience of the location where you usually met with the benefits specialist? Was it: {1,011}

31%26278411 4 116

Excellent Very good Good Excellent/very good/goodFair (Explain)Poor (Explain)Very poor (Explain)Fair/poor/very poor

B-2

8. Thinking about things like the availability of automatic doors, elevators and wheelchair ramps, how accessible was the building where you usually met? Was it: {974}

40%302393 4 2 17


9. How would you rate the privacy at your meeting place? Was it: {1,011}

40%302393 5 1 1 7


Question 10 was answered if question 5 was answered “telephone” or “both.” If question 5 was answered “face-to-face,” survey skipped to question 15.

10. Did you ever try to call the benefits specialist? {897}

76%24

YesNo (Skip to 15)

11. How satisfied were you with the time it usually took you to get through to the benefits specialist on the telephone? Were you: {672}

61%2990 7 310

Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied/somewhat satisfiedSomewhat dissatisfied (Explain)Very dissatisfied (Explain)Somewhat dissatisfied/very dissatisfied

12. Did you ever leave a message asking the benefits specialist to call you back? {651}

83%17

YesNo (Skip to 15)

B-3

13. How soon did the benefit specialist usually call you back? Was it usually the: {520}

42%331210 3

Same dayNext day2 days laterMore than 2 days laterNever called back

14. How satisfied were you with the time it took the benefits specialist to return a call? Were you: {519}

64%2589 6 511

Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Very satisfied/somewhat satisfiedSomewhat dissatisfied (Explain)Very dissatisfied (Explain)Somewhat dissatisfied/very dissatisfied

15. Now I’d like you to think about the benefits specialists that you spoke with. Were you helped by only one or more than one benefits specialist? {1,358}

72%28

Only oneMore than one

16. Thinking about all the benefits specialists who may have helped you, how would you rate their courtesy? Was it: {1,368}

59%251296 2 1 1 4


B-4

17. How would you rate the helpfulness of the benefits specialist? Was it: {1,362}

44%281890 5 3 210

ExcellentVery good Good Excellent/very good/goodFair (Explain)Poor (Explain)Very poor (Explain)Fair/poor/very poor

18. Would you rate the amount of time the benefits specialist spent with you as: {1,367}

46%291994 3 2 1 6


Now I’m going to read you a few statements and I’d like you to tell me whether you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree or strongly disagree with each statement.

19. I felt confident that the information the benefits specialist gave me was correct. Do you: {1,352}

72%2294 4 2 6

Strongly agree Somewhat agree Strongly agree/somewhat agreeSomewhat disagree (Explain)Strongly disagree (Explain)Somewhat disagree/strongly disagree

B-5

20. I felt the benefits specialist clearly explained how working and earning money would affect my cash benefits, medical insurance and other types of assistance. Do you: {1,336}

65%2792 5 3 8


21. After talking with the benefits specialist I knew what I was supposed to do or what was supposed to happen next. Do you: {1,326}

56%3187 9 413


22. Did the benefits specialist ever write something for you that explained your personal situation and your benefits? {1,232}

61%39

YesNo (Skip to 24)

23. Tell me whether you agree or disagree with this statement. The personal written explanation the benefits specialist gave me clearly told me what I needed to know. Do you: {746}

70%2595 32 5


B-6

24. Did the benefits specialist ever contact someone else on your behalf, such as a friend or relative, the Social Security office or Vocational Rehabilitation? {1,244}

43%57

YesNo (If 22 is answered “yes,” skip to 26; if 22 is answered “no,” skip to 27)

25. Tell me whether you agree or disagree with this statement. I think it was helpful when the benefits specialist contacted someone else for me. Do you: {521}

77%1794 4 2 5

Strongly agreeSomewhat agree Strongly agree/somewhat agreeSomewhat disagree (Explain)Strongly disagree (Explain)Somewhat disagree/strongly disagree

Question 26 was answered if question 22 and/or question 24 were answered “yes.”Otherwise, skipped to question 27.

26. Tell me whether you agree or disagree with this statement. When the benefits specialist had to take some action on my case, for example, send me something in the mail or make a phone call for me, they did it promptly. Do you: {865}

75%1994 3 3 6

Strongly agreeSomewhat agree Strongly agree/somewhat agreeSomewhat disagree (Explain)Strongly disagree (Explain)Somewhat agree/strongly disagree

27. Did the benefits specialist give you any other written material, such as pamphlets, booklets or fact sheets, with general information about working and disability benefits? {1,303}

82%18

YesNo (Skip to 29)

B-7

28. Tell me whether you agree or disagree with this statement. I think the pamphlets and booklets I received from the benefits specialist helped me understand how work and earnings affect my benefits. Do you: {1,033}

59%3392 5 3 8


29. Considering all the information and help given you by the benefits specialist from (site), how would you rate the service provided overall? Was the service: {1,366}

46%261789 5 3 311


Now I’d like to ask you some questions about yourself.

30. Were you working at the time you first talked with the benefits specialist? {1,366}

28%72

YesNo (Skip to 33)

31. Were you working full time (that is, 30 or more hours per week) or part time (less than 30 hours per week)? {375}

22%78

Full-timePart-time

Question 32 was answered by those respondents who said they were working at the time they met the benefits specialist (question 30 was answered “yes.”)

B-8

32. How did the information that the benefits specialist gave you affect your decision to continue working? After speaking with the benefits specialist did you: {368}

67%1411 8

Keep working at same rateIncrease the number of hours you workedDecrease the number of hours you workedStop working

(All skip to 34)

Question 33 was answered by those respondents who said they were not working at the time they met the benefits specialist (question 30 was answered “no.”)

33. How did the information that the benefits specialist gave you affect your decision to start working or not to work? After speaking with the benefits specialist did you: {953}

69%26 5

Remain unemployedStart working part time (less than 30 hours per week)Start working full time (30 hours or more per week)

34. Besides the information the benefits specialist gave you, do you feel that there were other things in your life that affected your decision about working? {1,352}

75%25

YesNo (Skip to 36)

35. What were the other things that affected your decision about working? {1014 responders gave 1,237 responses}

53% 317 5 4 6<112

Medical conditionChild care issueFamily situation other than child careEducation/literacy issueTransportation issueAvailability of jobs in areaLanguage barrierOther

B-9

36. Are you working right now, either part-time or full-time? {1,378}

33% 958

Yes – part-time (less than 30 hours per week)Yes - full-time (30 hours per week or more)No

37. What is the highest grade you completed in school? {1,375}

12%3623 516 9

Not a high school graduateHigh school graduate or equivalent (GED)Some collegeTrade/technical/vocational trainingCollege graduatePostgraduate work or degree

38. Do you have any other comments about the information or services you received from the benefits specialist? {1,379}

35%65

Yes (Explain)No

B-10

TAB C

Approximate Sampling Variability

The following table provides the approximate sampling variability for the data included in this report. To use this table, locate the nearest sample size and percentage estimate. If you need to estimate the sampling variability for a percentage estimate less than 50 percent, subtract the percentage estimate from 100 percent and use the result. Use the sample size closest to the number of responders for the particular stratum, subgroup or question.

PERCENTAGE ESTIMATESAMPLE

SIZE 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

50 ±6.0 ±8.3 ±9.9 ±11.1 ±12.0 ±12.7 ±13.2 ±13.6 ±13.8 ±13.9

100 4.3 5.9 7.0 7.8 8.5 9.0 9.3 9.6 9.8 9.8

150 3.5 4.8 5.7 6.4 6.9 7.3 7.6 7.8 8.0 8.0

200 3.0 4.2 4.9 5.5 6.0 6.4 6.6 6.8 6.9 6.9

250 2.7 3.7 4.4 5.0 5.4 5.7 5.9 6.1 6.2 6.2

300 2.5 3.4 4.0 4.5 4.9 5.2 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7

400 2.1 2.9 3.5 3.9 4.2 4.5 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.9

500 1.9 2.6 3.1 3.5 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.4

600 1.7 2.4 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.0

700 1.6 2.2 2.6 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7

800 1.5 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.5

1000 1.4 1.9 2.2 2.5 2.7 2.8 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.1

1200 1.2 1.7 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.8

1400 1.1 1.6 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.6

1600 1.1 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.5

1800 1.0 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.3

For example, to determine the sampling variability for the percentage of responders rating BPAO services overall as excellent, very good or good (89 percent), go to the row that is closest to the total of 1,366 respondents who gave a rating (1,400) and then to the column closest to 89 percent (90 percent) and read the sampling variability (+/1.6 percent). This means that the approximate 95-percent confidence level interval around the 89 percent satisfaction rating ranges from 87.4 percent (89 percent minus 1.6 percent = 87.4 percent) to 90.6 percent (89 percent plus 1.6 percent = 90.6 percent).

C-1

executive summary - cornell university · web viewfamily situation other than child care...

Documents