Sep 5, 2023

Administering SSI Is Difficult

     From a recent report by Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG):

... Homes that SSI applicants and recipients own and reside in do not count toward SSI resource limits. The current market values of any properties other than their owned primary residences, referred to as non-home real properties (NHRP), are generally considered countable resources for SSI eligibility purposes.

In 2017, SSA introduced an electronic search application that employees are required to use in most cases to identify applicants’ and recipients’ real-property information. We reviewed 400 applicants/recipients who had real properties identified through the search application. Of these, properties were a determining factor for SSI eligibility and payments in 122 cases.

SSA employees did not accurately determine property ownership and/or values for 17 (14 percent) of 122 SSI applicants/recipients. As a result, applicants were possibly denied SSI when they should not have been, and recipients received SSI payments for which they were not eligible. Of the 17 applicants/recipients:

  • 4 applicants may have been incorrectly denied SSI. SSA needs to further develop these cases to verify the applicants’ SSI eligibility, and
  • 13 recipients received over $180,000 in SSI payments for which they were not eligible.We determined employees did not correctly determine the applicants’/recipients’ countable resources, including reviewing for prior ownership. In addition, SSA employees did not add required documentation in SSA’s records to support their real-property determinations for these 17, and 43 other, cases.

We project 1,204 applicants may have been improperly denied SSI eligibility, and 35,885 recipients were improperly paid because SSA employees made inaccurate real-property determinations. ...


15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Before I retired they started making all CR's generalists. I was an SSI CR. T2 CR's had contempt towards SSI claimants. They were not particularly careful in their SSI determinations. They used the computer system to make decisions. Management did not promote the idea that you as the interviewer make the decision, then use the system to document your decision. I could see disaster looming. So glad to be out of there.

Anonymous said...

Saying SSI is hard to administer might be the understatement of the year.

It’s virtually impossible to administer in its current state.

Anonymous said...

Every field office technician reading this is thinking the same thing. “If I had 2 years to develop ownership I could do as good of a job as OIG.”

Anonymous said...

It was a mistake in the 70s to move it to a federal program. Welfare cannot be managed on that level. Send it back to the states.

Anonymous said...

@10:30 is exactly spot on.

The agency has made Claims Reps do every position imaginable and it's impossible to know every single rule the agency tries to enforce. You have to know every enumeration rule (who can and can't get an SSN, what documents are needed, etc), plus you have to know every single rule for Title 2 claims RIB and DIB. And you have to know every single rule for T16 SSI. Don't forget Medicare rules, plus knowing all of the 10 million applications that SSA employees are forced to use, it's impossible. It's impossible to know it all. Claim's Reps are already stretched thin enough as is. Management at the agency is delusional. Current management at the agency did claim's work when there were plenty of Customer Service Reps who did all of the enumeration issues, and "cross training" wasn't a thing, so people had years to specialize in either T2 or T16. NOPE, not anymore. The agency is so focused on phasing out the Customer Service Rep role, that all the hire are Claim's Reps and force them to do EVERYTHING, and then wonder why shit is wrong. It's delusion at it's finest.

Anonymous said...

"Send it back to the states". So glad I don't live in Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Florida, . . . . So glad I live in a civilized and educated state.

Anonymous said...

You are so right 11:56 DC knows better than the people of the state what people need. SMH

Anonymous said...

I've seen people keep worthless property for who knows what reason. If they just deed it to someone for love and affection, how long can SSA penalize them? That might be a better option for some, rather than the long term disqualification from keepong the resource.

Anonymous said...

10:30 - Amen The nuance of trying to "be fair" with complex situations takes years to figure out. Add contempt for the applicant into the mix and it's a crap shoot on accuracy.

10:43 - double Amen to an office that, if held to CR standards in reviewing a case instead of the luxury of time and resources, would likely fail more than the CR.

11:12 and 3:33 - your politics is showing (or else you are T2 CRs...) If Nixon was the one to federalize SSI it was because the states inability to do it after over 30 years couldn't be overlooked. It's the Congress with the SSI legislation since who have shown the inability to listen to informed sources and instead created a mess. But that mess is still a better mess than what the states have done (ask any one who deals with Medicaid, medical and otherwise...)

4:30 if it were truly worthless... but if it has a cash value of some sort the program demands you be a pauper.

Anonymous said...

4:30 The program does not demand you be a pauper. Rather Congress says you are not eligible for SSI if you own valuable property. What part of that do you not understand?

Anonymous said...

This was perfectly said.

Anonymous said...

Didn’t know there was such a state.

Anonymous said...

7:13 I deal with Medicaid every single day, I do it in 5 states currently, IL MO PA KS and NE. Mostly MSP for QMB or SLMB along with LTC. It is not remotely as complex as SSI. I have several SSI Aged clients, mostly in PA, that are currently SSA RIB, SSI Aged, Medicare A,B D with LIS, Medicaid MSP and Medicaid LTC.

I will tell you the honest truth, it is 100% absurd to have to deal with all of those programs. It is an embarrassment to the low earning individual and an expectation that they can navigate the system through all the different rules. My population I assist happens to be low earning, but also highly educated, they are Women Religious, nothing lower than a BA/BS most with MA and even a couple of PhDs but they cannot navigate the system.

If the system worked like it was intended, I would be out of a job. I make a good living because voters (including the people on the programs!) hate poor people and have zero idea how to manage the programs. Ask any State of Federal senator or representative if they have ever personally completed an application, redetermination, or refile in any of these programs.

Anonymous said...

8:15 - there are other Medicaid funded programs for the disabled, dealing with housing, group homes, rental assistance, caretakers and daily supports, transition etc. Each state's programs are unique with years long waiting lists and non-transferrable, move states and you start over. That's such a mess. Sure, each state gets to customize their programs for their populations (theory) but the result is 50+ setups where each is unique. Some offer a variation of benefit X, some do not. Some offer it only for a small subset - even the professionals who do service coordination have issues keeping things straight.

Anonymous said...

Have a look at this thread on reddit from a new T16 rep.
https://www.reddit.com/r/fednews/comments/16blu8e/new_to_social_securityclaims_specialist_anybody/