Social Security's Office of Inspector General has issued a report on Administrative Law Judge Trends.
Below are three charts from the report. As always, click on the image to view full size.
Social Security's Office of Inspector General has issued a report on Administrative Law Judge Trends.
Below are three charts from the report. As always, click on the image to view full size.
10 comments:
Interesting data in many ways. What is not clear is how they define allowance rate.
ocial Security divides outcomes by Dismissal, Favorable, and Unfavorable. Is their allowance rate percent favorable of cases where decisions are made excluding Dismissals or including Dismissals? At least in Table 1, it looks like Dismissals are not included and the percentages are only for decisions on the merits.
It should also be noted that even within the favorables, some are partial and some are fully favorable.
I have several of the 0-20% granters in my region. Would love to see O'Malley pursue them with the same zeal that the high payers got 10 years ago.
It appears that the full-time remote phone/video hearings during the covid years had little impact on the allowance/denial rates.
Yep, sure does look more productive to me.
10:50 you might want to look at the number of applications. My office was averaging 48 decisions per ALJ before Covid. One-third of our ALJ's retired. The office is struggling to schedule 30 per ALJ, good month is 35 per. There's no big backlog of files to get ready for hearing, that's just the volume arriving from state DDS.
The decline you see is due to the decline (and in many cases full stoppage) of cases leaving the DDS offices.
How can this be???? I was assured here that rates would plummet without in-person hearings!
Why can SSA never seem to get the ratio of ALJs and DDS staff correct? Is it because DDS are state run, and SSA has little oversight ability? Or Does SSA advise or coordinate with state DDS offices that are falling behind? Because this seems like perennial problem. And can SSA not create a centralized office of DDS examiners that can assist State Agencies that are struggling? Is this prohibited by statute?
Drew C, Regions do coordinate with DDSs constantly, that is a daily working relationship. Hiring only comes in waves however, FREEZE!!! HIRE!!! FREEZE!! There was/is never an adequate level of constant staff replacement in the DDSs. This has hurt them terribly over the years and continues to do so now even though hiring was turned on for this year. So it is not so much of a oversight issue but rather a resource one. SSA keeps turning the spigot on and off. As for a centralized source of assistance that currently exists in the various regional federal Disability Processing Branches and the Disability Processing Units. That assistance should be provided based on which states need it the most but some of it (most maybe, who knows) is directed internally to where the individual Regional Commissioners need it in order to meet their SES goals for the year.
@10:23
Thanks for responding. Yes, that is my impression too. SSA will fix a backlog in one part of the agency, only for the backlog/resource issue to shift to another part of agency. It is an endless cycle of dysfunction, but it now feels like no part of agency is operating well. OHO is struggling with exhibiting files timely & correctly, DDS is a mess, and FOs are overwhelmed and making constant mistakes. The payment center call reps are also less competent and I used to be able to speak directly with a CA when everyone worked in the same office. I was recently surprised to find out OIG screwed up in remanding one of my Federal Court wins from march...the case was never sent to the Appeals Council
Post a Comment