The economic downturn, inadequate funding and red tape are at the core of an increasing backlog of Social Security disability cases, panelists said during a roundtable discussion in Washington on Thursday.The government has tried for years to reduce the number of cases awaiting review from administrative law judges, but the recession is a significant setback, said Alan Cohen, senior budget adviser for the Senate Finance Committee.
"Initial claims are going to skyrocket in 2010," he said during the forum, organized by the Association of Administration Law Judges. "The tsunami hasn't hit the administrative law judges here." ...
"You just need the money to properly administer the program," said Kathryn Olson, staff director for the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security. "Too much pressure to crank out cases really does undermine the integrity of the process." ...
Some panelists said SSA's plan to reduce the backlog by 2013 was forcing judges to take on too many cases.
"I am truly stunned by the suggestion that administrative law judges should review 500 to 700 cases per year," said U.S. Magistrate Judge Jillyn Schulze, referring to an expectation set by Chief Administrative Judge Frank A. Cristaudo in a 2008 letter to administrative law judges. "That is truly unconscionable."
May 29, 2009
Roundtable On Backlogs
From Government Executive:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Assuming there are approximately 220 working days in a year, give or take depending on vacation, that kind of production demand requires reviewing and deciding an average 2-3 cases per day, yet the issues to be covered are incredibly complex. I honestly don't know how they can justify that, but I'm sure we'll see more of the "computers will solve all our problems" mentality from SSA when it doesn't work.
I saw a recent time study where the agency expects 195 minutes per case on average. Three hours 15 minutes to review all the medical, research any novel legal issues, conduct hearing, develop the case, review new medical, issue decision instructions, edit the decision and electronically sign it. Then the ALJ is expected to change the status every time he;she does something on it. Can it be done? Of course. But should it be done? Would you want me to devote that little time to your case? Would you like time pressure to affect my decision on whether to order a CE or even update medical evidence?
What is scary is that the Agency permits judges to do as many as they can crank through - some do over 900 - 1,000. There is no way a judge can issue 75 - 100 decisions a month and be reviewing the evidence. While the Agency cannot tell a judge how to decide a case, they could cap the number of hearing held.
The Agency does a lot more than permit judges to crank out a large number of cases. They encourage, reward and praise those that do. Even COSS Astrue has said of one judge who pays +/- 2500cases per year that he can't possibly be doing the job as intended, but no action is taken. Consider that no one complains if a claimant is paid, the only review occurs if the case is denied and then the result is often a ridiculous remand.
In our office, senior case techs don't put pages in an exhibit in chronological order. So a page from 2001 may be in the middle of 2 pages from 2007. I reviewed a file last week that had the same hospital admission as 4 different exhibits with different page numbers. I had to review all four because there were things in one exhibit not in another. All this while I am supposed to take less time on a case. And writers are in such a time squeeze, they can't do anything but spit out meaningless drivel and pass it on. So I am faced with the choice of signing the meaningless drivel or take time to rewrite the decision. Cases aren't people anymore; they're only numbers.
Post a Comment