Social Security has some very preliminary results from the Benefits Offset Pilot Demonstration (BOPD) (emphasis added):
No wonder Social Security wants to stretch out BOND over ten years.We designed the four-State BOPD project to provide information about the implementation and the effect of a benefit offset for SSDI beneficiaries. We used the information collected in BOPD to help design the BOND [Benefits Offset National Demonstration] project....The pilot includes a targeted group of SSDI [Social Security Disability Insurance] beneficiaries who chose to volunteer for the project. We gave them the opportunity to receive a $1 reduction in benefits for every $2 earned above the SGA [Substantial Gainful Activity] threshold amount during the extended period of eligibility (EPE), instead of losing their entire benefit, as they would have under our usual rules....The State [by state] reports show that the benefit offset had a positive effect on the percentage of beneficiaries who have earnings above the SGA amount ($980 per month for the non-blind in 2009). We conducted our own analysis using Internal Revenue Service earnings data and our benefit payment administrative records. We found similar effects on earnings. However, our analysis also showed an increase in benefit payments because we made partial benefit payments under the benefit offset to beneficiaries who would have had their benefits suspended due to SGA under the current program rules....
5 comments:
To answer your question: No, rehabilitating disability beneficiaries does not cost more than it saves. The BOND is one demonstration that hasn't been running very long. There have been other demonstrations and programs that have shown that there is an economic benefit to helping people with disabilities go to work. Furthermore, there are personal and societal benefits to helping people who are essentially living in poverty to become self-sufficient. Obviously the numbers are relatively small but it is worth the effort.
What's the purpose of rehabbing the disabled when there aren't enough jobs for the non-disabled?
I understand your concern but I hope you aren't saying don't help people with disabilities because they might take a job away from someone who doesn't have a disability. Please don't go there---that is a form of discrimination that shouldn't be tolerated. Hopefully the jobs situation will improve as we move away from the almost depression we had been facing.
even if there is an accounting wash or even loss, there might be an economic gain through the multiplier effect of getting people to be productive again. assuming there are jobs for them, of course.
The jobs taken by the disabled are often those which others won't/don't take. For only one example: sheltered workshop jobs which are self-sustaining for the "workshop" and provide some pride, some sense of worth, and some monetary help to the participants.
Post a Comment