SSA [Social Security Administration] policy provides for disability claims filed by current and former military service members to be expedited. SSA identifies these claims as Military Casualty/Wounded Warrior (MC/WW) and Veteran 100 Percent Permanent and Total (VAPT) disability claims. ... VAPT classifications do not guarantee an allowance for SSA disability benefits. VAPT recipients must meet SSA’s disability medical eligibility and entitlement requirements. ...
SSA does not define “expeditious” for processing MC/WW and VAPT claims, have processing time goals, or perform regular analysis of the MC/WW and VAPT claims to identify trends. Therefore, to assess the MC/WW and VAPT processing times, we compared them to the average processing time for all disability claims at the various stages of review nationally and by State. We found the following.
At the initial claims level, SSA processed MC/WW and VAPT claims only 1 day faster than it processed all disability claims.
SSA processed MC/WW and VAPT claims from 37 to 315 days more quickly than all disability claims at the reconsideration, hearing office, and Appeals Council levels.
Average processing times varied across States.
There were processing delays attributable to SSA as well as delays outside SSA’s control.
Finally, SSA designed and implemented internal controls to identify and flag MC/WW and VAPT claims to prioritize the processing of those claims. However, SSA could not provide us evidence that it followed its policies and procedures to ensure staff and management properly tracked or monitored MC/WW and VAPT claims.
By the way, I've seen the same sort of thing with other categories where Social Security is supposed to speed review, such as homeless claimants. A "critical case" designation seems to mean nothing at the initial and reconsideration levels but usually a lot at the hearing or Appeals Council levels.
12 comments:
When I have a MC/WW hearing, it routinely is scheduled several months sooner than others; often the dust has barely settled from the recon denial. But I don't see any reason for expediting those claims (other than political), since they are receiving income and taking the place of others who have note.
@3:38
I think the original intent was to assume there is some corollary between a well-supported VA claim, and the standards of the SSA. That's sorta true. I would bet the average 100% awarded VA recipient would have better evidence than the average SSA claimant. What's really was needed was not faster scheduling, but pre-hearing review for on-the-record decisions.
It would be interesting to see the allowance rates for 100% disabled rated veterans. I am sure higher than the average but I'd imagine much less than 50%. Some of those veterans are working and making good wages elsewhere before they file. The military casualty veterans can be vets who got out in the early 2000s and have worked at a good level until very recently. Most are not what the public pictures--someone who lost their limbs in an IED attack in the war.
@3:38 by your standards then a person with a spouse that is working and getting income should be moved back as well, or LTD payments.
Wonder how many commenters served?
Anon 11:59 What is your point?
My father was in the military. My grandfather had 6 siblings serve in WWII. I have done some military type training but never served.
So if you have never served, then you cannot have sympathy for veterans? What is your point?
@11:56 #1
I'm not 3:38, but no one is advocating anyone get moved behind anyone else. It's whether a VPAT (which, to address an earlier point, has next to nothing to do with SSA's evaluation standards. It was motivated by optics than anything else) should jump ahead of everyone else. If they're already getting paid as unemployable, they're likely not in dire need of the money, much like a person whose spouse is working is not likely a dire need case. So why should they be jumped to the front?
Though if your question is whether someone that is not about to lose their house and become homeless because they have some measure of financial security, either SC disability payments, LTD, or a spouse's income, should have their hearing behind someone that is facing that circumstance, then yes, I would say that.
Military type training. 'Nuff said!
"Military type training" ie Booty Boot Camp
@1:31, https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v74n3/v74n3p1.html chart 16 shows that the award rate for those with 100% VA ratings was 73.4%
This was in 2000-2006 so award rates are probably lower now, but that was nearly 15 percentage points higher than all DI applicants at the time and I would guess there is still a higher than usual award rate, probably well over the 50% you guessed.
@1:31 just an fyi, many of us vets are missing a limb or more, and we continue to work.
As a veteran, there is a BIG difference between 100% disabled and 100% P&T, some of these cases are not being coded correctly. Every Veteran should have to supply their award letter from VA that states 100% or 100% P&T.
Post a Comment