The Subcommittee of the Senate
Appropriations Committee that covers the Social Security Administration
has issued a draft appropriations bill. Here's some language from the draft report on the bill:
Disability Early Intervention Initiative.—The Committee recommendation includes $35,000,000 for a new disability early intervention initiative at SSA. This demonstration project will test models to improve outcomes for individuals with disabilities who are not yet receiving Social Security disability benefits, but who are likely to in the future, focusing on helping them remain in the workforce....
Preventing Improper Social Security Payments.—The Committee recommendation includes $1,396,000,000 for SSA to conduct continuing disability reviews and SSI redeterminations of non-medical eligibility, a $199,000,000 increase over the fiscal year 2014 level. ...
The Committee recommendation includes $11,921,040,000, a $224,000,000 increase, for SSA’s administrative expenses....
The Committee recommendation includes $83,000,000 in mandatory funds for research and demonstration projects conducted under sections 1110, 1115, and 1144 of the Social Security Act. These funds support a variety of research and demonstration projects designed to improve the disability process, promote selfsufficiency and assist individuals in returning to work, encourage savings and retirement planning through financial literacy, and generally provide analytical and data resources for use in preparing and reviewing policy proposals. ...
The Committee remains concerned about the impact of persistently tight budget constraints on SSA’s ability to provide convenient, quality, and timely services to the public. After years of inadequate funding in the mid-2000s basic services began to suffer. For example, by 2008 it took an average of 532 days to process a disability hearing, and a substantial number of cases were pending for over 900 and even 1,000 days. Significant funding increases in fiscal years 2009 and 2010 allowed SSA to work down this backlog and reduce waiting times while keeping pace with increasing workloads.
The Committee is deeply concerned that significantly reduced discretionary spending caps—non-defense discretionary spending subject to caps is $28 billion less in fiscal year 2015 than projected in August 2011—and the resulting budget constraints for SSA have reversed these positive trends and are impacting basic services to the American public. Individuals are waiting longer to receive initial disability decisions and to hear back on their appeals, waiting longer at field offices, and increasingly reaching busy signals or waiting longer when they call SSA’s 1–800 number. In recent years SSA has closed many offices, reduced hours offices are open to the public, and reduced services available at field offices. ...
At the same time, program integrity activities, including but not limited to CDRs and SSI redeterminations, have significantly increased.
The Committee supports such activities but remains particularly concerned about the balance in funding for program integrity activities and the core basic services at field offices, SSA’s 1–800 number, disability determination services, and hearing offices that millions of Americans rely on every day. Therefore, the Committee recommendation includes a $224,000,000 increase over the fiscal year 2014 level for LAE to keep pace with rising costs and improve services to the public, while also increasing program integrity efforts. ...
Access and Availability of Benefit Verification Letters and SSN Printouts.—The Committee remains concerned about plans to eliminate the Social Security Number printout, and to limit the availability of Benefit Verification letters at field offices. The Committee agrees that SSN printouts should be phased out but remains concerned about the planned timeline. Similarly, the Committee remains unconvinced that the availability of Benefit Verification letters at field offices should be limited. The Committee appreciates that SSA has revised its guidance related to Benefit Verification letters and the ability of individuals to continue to receive this document at field offices but remains concerned about the effect of the overall policy change. It is often third parties, such local government agencies, banks, or employers that require individuals to provide these documents. While the Committee strongly supports SSA encouraging third parties to use existing online tools to verify the same information, and eliminate the need for individuals to provide these documents altogether, that ultimately relies on third parties to do so. Similarly, the Committee supports individuals being able to access this information through multiple service channels, including over the phone or online. However, many individuals will prefer or need to request this information in-person at a field office. The Committee strongly encourages SSA to continue to make these documents readily available at field offices until there is more evidence or better assurances that individuals will not be adversely impacted by any changes.This is nuts. The draft would increase funding for program integrity by 14% but increase appropriations for agency operations otherwise by only 2%, probably not enough to cover inflation. The authors of the draft say they are "deeply concerned" that basic services at Social Security are being affected by sequestration yet demand that the agency provide services that it can't afford. Social Security is given no guidance on what services it should cut. Meanwhile, a ridiculous amount of money is wasted on "research" and "demonstration projects." I defy anyone to show me an example of a Social Security research or demonstration project that ever helped the American people. It all gets wasted on beltway bandits.
And the Senate is much more concerned about service at Social Security than the House of Representatives.
Person with a disability here.
ReplyDeleteThe budget should expand online services. A service that allowed a beneficiary/claimant to pay for and download claim folder records/information and other services would be very helpful.
Actually, I can think of two "demo" projects that benefited representatives - withholding and direct payment to EDPNAs (eligible for direct payment non-attorneys) and withholding and direct payment from SSI payment to all eligible representatives -- though there may be some question as to exactly how much this benefited the trust funds or claimants themselves.
ReplyDeletePerhaps a "demo" project which should be done is to try sending a single check made to the claimant AND the representative. This is how insurance companies disburse funds. When reporting to Congress, SSA has always listed huge time estimates needed to process checks. Any labor savings could be used to process cases. State bars are incredibly strict about client money and will yank an attorney's license for any misappropriation. Non-attorney reps should be held to the same standard or lose the right to represent claimants.
ReplyDeleteSSA cannot do this without Congress making it possible. Section 207 prohibits levy, garnishment, or attachment of SSA bens. Making the rep's signature a requirement for the claimant to receive their funds would violate this portion of the Act. If you want this done as a "demo", then you need to talk to Congress!
ReplyDelete