Below is a comment made about the allegation that disability claims dismissed for failure to cooperate had gone up to 30% at one California Disability Determination Service (DDS) office. In one sense, the writer is a little confused. No one is alleging that the number of dismissals went up because of any change at Social Security field offices. The allegation is that changes were made at a DDS office, but that is a quibble. In a larger sense this comment helps explain how what is alleged could happen. Many Social Security claimants need a lot of help. Many of them are frustrating to deal with. It is not easy to say where one should draw the line and say "I've done as much as I should reasonably be expected to do. Either start cooperating or your case is going to get dismissed." When employees are overworked, whether at DDS or a Social Security field office, the line is likely to be drawn at a different place than would be the case if the workloads were more reasonable. As a nation, I think we ought to be encouraging Social Security and DDS employees to go the extra mile and give a lot of help to claimants with cognitive or psychiatric difficulties, but we cannot expect them to do so if they are badly overworked.
Social Security claims reps and service reps are not social workers. Not trained as social workers, not in their job description. And many of the SSI clientele need someone to hold their hands and help them through the process, but some people are just not willing to help themselves. Just this week, I had two cases where the parent had made two appointments to file claims for either two children or themselves and a child. Our appointment calendar is so solidly booked that these appointments were pushed about a month after request. So, our office set aside 3 hours to do what was necessary to file two claims. Both parents cancelled the appointments the same day because they weren't ready after about a month lead time. How much hand holding is SSA supposed to do? The parent is the best source of knowledge, but was unwilling to put forth any effort to file the claim. The parent did not make it a priority and that is just not the fault of SSA. It is very difficult to help people who don't want to do anything to help themselves. I shouldn't care more about the outcome of a claim more than the claimant does. I would really prefer to spend my limited work hours processing claims for people who do manage to complete forms in a reasonable amount of time and who do make a reasonable effort to provide answers to the questions asked.
However, I do believe strongly in due process and applying the regulations without shortcuts and providing assistance as it is needed. To hell with processing time in some claims. But I cannot complete the ADL's on anyone without their assistance. I don't know their lives. They do.
If Astrue truly cared about correcting bad "failure to cooperate" denials, he needs to implement more accountability across the board for technical errors and provide more staff to do the work. Without staff, the backlog will grow. I still think he is using this issue as a bully pulpit to get Schwarzeneggar to back down on his ridiculous furlough of DDS employees. So, I hope he takes a close look at all shortcuts taken by SSA employees. And find a way to properly staff the agency. Automation is not the only answer.
3 comments:
The heart of the failure to cooperate matter is that: DDS examiners in California and throughout the nation are closing cases after about 3 weeks of receiving the claim from the field office. They believe it is ok to do this because the DDS has mailed the claimant ADL forms with language that sets the consequence for not complying. The DDS will mail the ADL form twice, about 10 days apart. If the claimant does not comply, the due process language on the forms has already put the claimant on notice that their claim may be closed, so the DDS closes it...easy closures leads to lower numbers on a DDS caseload. This is a real nasty way to lower numbers on a DDS caseload, but there is no SSA policy that precludes this practice. The DDS does not commonly care about the claimant, they care about the statistics on caseloads that SSA holds them accountable for. Part of the problem is that SSA has known about this practice and has turned its cheek because of statistics. Now that Congress has word of it, the Commissioner is appalled? The pecking order has known about this and the Inspector General should start their investigation with them(SSA executives).
A#1's comment is a good summary of the current situation. It is important to remember that this deterioration in service has been created through intentional budget cuts and staffing starvation over the past 20 or so years. Nothing accidental about it.
What to do? Well, building new facilities has nothing to do with it. But, tell that to the politicals who run SSA. The phrase "deaf ears" doesn't touch it. Nancy Ortiz
FOs deny claims when they don't get wet-signatured medical releases within a "reasonable" period of time..by the book, 30 days, but we all know there are offices that shave that timeframe in order to clear backlogs.
It's time to retire the antiquated wet signature requirement on releases. The claim "signature" is electronic. If this is done, the ball is in the DDS' court.
Post a Comment