From CBS News:
... There are approximately 10.1 million Black children nationwide, and Census data reveals an alarming 9.6% of them, or about 975,000, had lost at least one parent as of 2021. That figure has doubled in the past decade, with a sharp increase due to the COVID-19 pandemic. One study found that Black children lost caregivers at twice the rate of White children from April 2020 until the end of 2022.
Recent Social Security data shows that only about 26% of Black children who have lost a parent — 257,533 — are receiving survivor benefits, according to the analysis by David Weaver, a former Social Security Administration executive and researcher. The comparable percentage for non-Black children is 46%. Roughly 30,000 fewer Black children are receiving survivor benefits than in 2009, the last time the data was broken down by race. ...
For those who are eligible, a lack of awareness that Social Security offers payments for family survivors — and not only retirees — is often cited as the primary impediment to connecting children with the benefits they're owed. The surviving parent or caregiver is responsible for claiming the benefits on the child's behalf, and many are unaware that the benefit exists. ...
Social Security generally knows when someone dies. Couldn't they send out a notice addressed to the survivors of the decedent at the decedent's old address notifying them that survivor benefits may be available? How difficult is that?
By the way, the numbers for white kids is itself alarming. The numbers for African-American kids is way beyond alarming.
Also, this is further proof that when it comes to Social Security, most people know almost nothing and half of what they think they know is wrong.
11 comments:
In my experience the principal barrier to SURCHD benefits is lack of insured status for the deceased parent - no use in sending a letter out to relatives of those uninsured. A study that analyzed the percentage of eligible children who are/are not receiving benefits would tell us something useful.
"Couldn't they send out a notice addressed to the survivors of the decedent at the decedent's old address notifying them that survivor benefits may be available? How difficult is that?"
This is a broad statement from someone with little knowledge of how SSA systems actually works. If the person has never received SSA benefits, and has never registered for an online MySSA account, SSA will have no address on record, so where do they send the letter? Secondly, as already mentioned, what if the person is not insured for Survivor's benefits? Does SSA just blanket send out letters regardless, creating more work when they survivor eventually calls in and SSA has to tell them, one-by-one, that they aren't eligible due to lack of insured status? If the person was receiving SSA benefits, but the parents were separated at the time of death, if the letter is sent to the deceased's address, what does that do for the separated spouse who may have custody of the children?
Again, lots of people who don't work for SSA always seem to think everything is so easy and should just be done automatically, unfortunately (at the current moment), that's now how SSA systems work. Some of these things could be fixed in the future if SSA gets enough of a budget to fix its atrocious IT system, but until now, what do you expect them to do?
How many of the parents who died are fully or currently insured? I'm sure there are some. My experience is that the poor may not know how the benefits work but know enough to contact SSA.
Regarding sending letters: SSA frequently sends closeout letters to spouses and caregivers for children who would receive if they file
In my experience, a minority of those who receive letters file. I try to call them to say, "Hey, you and/or your children will get so much money if you file. But you need an address for the letter and phone number to call them.
Excuses, Excuses. We could do a lot better in terms of customer service/outreach but the bean counters would never allow that. See the item on the recent Harvard Study.
@10:58
1. It's quite normal, probably actually the most common way it is done, for funeral homes to notify SSA of a death to develop the LSDB. POMS RS 00210.005 explains what happens when LSDB is being developed, and the information that is intended to be gathered is already sufficient to address your concerns (relationship to decedent, children involved, residence address, etc.)
2. Yes, send out a blanket letter to instruct residents to apply so that SSA can look into it. That's entirely normal. They do it all the time.
3. Yeah if the parents are separated it could get lost in the mail. No reason not to try, and as addressed above, to get the LSDB, SSA is supposed to develop these issues already.
The last part about knowing almost nothing is rich.
Most deaths are reported by EDR. EDR does not permit listing a potential survivor. Ergo, unless that person was receiving benefits and had a dependent on their record, no lead is established (POMS GN 00202.020).
If a SSA-721 report of death is received, it is only a lead if a potential survivor is listed.
As there is no lead, SSA could potentially be wasting millions by sending out letters to deceased parties that have no dependents - as it is not currently supported by regs or policy.
If anything, the best way to approach this is to target where the surviving child will have an initial point of contact: through their schools. The schools (administrative assistant, guidance counselor) could have stock letters to provide to the child, parent or guardian so they can contact SSA.
If you are going to be wasteful and send spam letters, the only reliable way would be to use a current myssa account or send to the last address on a W-2 -which is limited to what that information can be used for (iirc).
Congress should give them money for commercials if they really want to get serious about marketing. These random articles are really useless hit jobs. The reasons black children have more deceased parents is the problem that needs to be addressed not SSA outreach after the fact. Also, in my experience tons of black children in the inner city get applied for for SSI by their remaining parent so entitlements are often found and many inner city black families understand the basic rules a bit more due to more frequent contact with the agency.
There is also the issue of paternity to consider, as there are so many children of all races born outside of marriage these days.
A lot of these children aren't eligible because the parents weren't married at the time of the child's birth and there is simply no proof of paternity. In fact, I took two just today, and another office had taken a 3rd on that same wage earner a couple weeks ago. There isn't a shred of evidence that he is the father of any of those 3 kids, beyond the mothers saying he is, and they are all likely going to be denied. This happens quite frequently in cases where child support isn't involved (and even in some cases that do involve it, given the tendency of the courts to issue default orders of paternity and support that SSA won't accept without additional supporting evidence that often doesn't exist).
For the two claims I took, I gave the mother information about state intestacy rules regarding DNA testing (i.e. exactly what SSA has to have to be able use the rules of such tests, and further hinted that she might want to speak to a legal specialist in state intestacy law for the state involved) and told her that new evidence could be submitted at any time within 4 years of a denial. The state involved does have precedents for grandparent DNA testing, and the mother alleges the grandmother acknowledges the kids as her grandchildren. However, based upon my past experience, the mother won't bother due to the expense (even though they stand to greatly benefit in the long term from a successful claim).
It is what it is.
It could be distressing to get a letter saying survivor benefits may be payable, only to find out that the NH doesn't meet insured status requirements.
Also the trust fund is already in trouble.
Black babies are born out of wedlock about 70% of the time. States vary in how easy or not it is to prove paternity. Many claims don't fall under 216h3.
@8:56
True, but I would be even more distressed if I learned I was eligible for benefits years after it was too late to apply.
And the trust funds are not in trouble and trying to prop them up further by hiding eligibility from children is horrifying.
Post a Comment