A Message From The New Commissioner To Agency Employees On Telework

From: ^Commissioner Broadcast <Commissioner.Broadcast@ssa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 2:31 PM
Subject: Increasing Our Onsite Presence

A Message to All SSA Employees

Subject:  Increasing Our Onsite Presence 

Every morning for the last 32 days, I’ve been going to work at headquarters or catching pre-dawn flights to Social Security Regions across our country. 

I do this to hear from — and learn from — as many of you as possible, as soon as possible, about what’s really going on.

And while the best ideas for improving our operations always come from those on the frontlines, some decisions must ultimately fall to the Commissioner.

So, let’s acknowledge this truth:

The Covid pandemic and shutdown changed the nature of work. There is no private sector company or public agency in the world which has since found the perfect balance between onsite presence and telework.

But because I understand any new adjustments to our telework policies will affect you personally, I wanted to give you as much advance notice as possible so you can make adjustments in your own balance between work and life.

After much listening and deep consideration of currently available evidence, I have decided that the following policies will be effective across the Social Security Administration beginning April 7, 2024.

Here’s WHAT’S NOT changing:

• Field Offices will remain open to the public five days a week.
• Employees in field offices, teleservice centers, and program service centers (including the Office of Central Operations) will continue their current balance of onsite presence and telework. 
• Employees in hearing offices, hearing centers, and case assistance centers will continue their current balance of onsite presence and telework. ALJ hearings will continue to be held five days a week by teleconference, videoconference, or in-person, at the option of claimants and their representatives.
• Employees in the Office of Appellate Operations and the Office of Quality Review will continue their current balance of onsite days and telework.
• Employees with nonportable workloads and those ineligible for telework will continue their onsite presence.

Here’s WHAT IS changing:

• In our headquarters and regional offices, we will be moving to “core collaboration days.”  We do this in order to better serve the American people, to better support our new trainees, and to better support and train our frontline workers in their mission.

Therefore:

• I will be present onsite at the Baltimore Headquarters (or in regional or area offices) five days a week.
• The Commissioner’s Office will be onsite four days a week with one day of telework optional.
• Because servant leaders make themselves present and accountable to the people they lead, Deputy Commissioners, employees in headquarters components, regional offices, and area director offices will increase their onsite presence to three days per week with two days of telework optional.
• Employees in the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) will increase their onsite presence to two days per week — with greater presence for top level executives at the discretion of the CIO.

Our return to a greater onsite presence not only gives us more opportunity for collaboration, engagement, and innovation, but it also brings us into alignment with other federal agencies across government, who have been increasing their own onsite presence.

Conclusion:

In the coming days, you will receive more information from your managers about logistics like signing up for a transit subsidy, updating your parking badge, making your desk arrangements, and more.  Facilities will also be working to expand cafeteria and onsite food options on core collaboration days.

As we improve the quality of our data to measure our effectiveness across the complex components of the Agency, we will continue to adjust in order to reach the best possible balance within individual units. These decisions will honor both the letter and the spirit of our Union agreements. And these decisions will be based on the mission of SSA using the best available evidence, not fear.

Our mission is the security of the men, women, and children of our Nation.

Thank you for your dedication, and I look forward to seeing you in-person if I haven’t already.

Yours in solidarity,

Martin O’Malley

Commissioner

How Crazy Is The Right Wing In America?

     People are starting to ask what will happen to Social Security benefits if Texas secedes.

Improvement In Mail Processing But Some Problems Persist

    From Follow-up: The Social Security Administration’s Implementation of Mail Procedures, a report by Social Security's Office of Inspector General (footnotes omitted):

...  Mail processing at SSA offices is primarily a manual workload. This requires that managers and employees open each mail item, scan the program-related documents into a workload management system, and assign to staff. SSA’s regional offices are responsible for monitoring the status of mail handling in their region ...

In September 2021, SSA issued a Mail Handling BPD that focused on 10 key issues significant to mail processing. ...

We judgmentally selected and visited 87 SSA offices throughout the continental United States. At each office, we interviewed management and observed the mail handling process. ...

SSA offices had improved mail processing since our July 2021 review. SSA offices we visited generally complied with the requirements in the Agency’s Mail Handling BPD.While most offices were meeting the requirements of 6 of the 10 BPD key issues, some offices did not always meet the requirements ...

Of the 87 offices visited, the following offices complied with the timeliness metrics established:

• 86 (98.9 percent) received mail directly from mail carriers,

• 84  (96.6 percent) opened mail within 1 business day of receipt,

• 81 (93.1 percent) processed all Social Security number applications within 5 business days of receipt, and

• 79 (90.8 percent) returned all original primary evidence documents to customers within 3 business days  of receipt and kept a log of the returned documents.  ...

• 73 (83.9 percent) processed their undeliverable returned mail within 5 business days of receipt, as required. However, the remaining 14 offices had undeliverable returned mail over 30-days-old. Moreover, three of these offices had mail dated back to January 2022, and one with mail dated back to September 2019. ... 
  

• 67 (77 percent) complied with the requirements for remittances and returned unendorsed Treasury checks. Specifically, the offices processed to completion all remittances and returned unendorsed Treasury checks within 1 business day of receipt, 16 recorded receipt in the office’s remittance log, and secured 17 checks that could not be processed to completion the same day. The remaining 20 offices had the following issues:
  

• 17 did not process remittances within the required timeframe. Of these, 15 offices had checks that remained unprocessed 3 to 31 days after the 1-business-day requirement. Additionally, two offices had unprocessed checks that dated back to July 2020 and November 2021. The banks could return these checks as non-negotiable since they were not endorsed within 6 months, as required by banks.,
  

• 5 did not use remittance logs, as required. For example, 1 office had 77 unprocessed checks that were unsecured and accessible to office staff. In fact, 1 office had 58 checks dating back to October 2022 with no record they existed. The new remittance manager was unaware these unprocessed checks were locked in a safe because they were not recorded in the office’s remittance log.
  

• 2 did not properly secure the unprocessed checks. For example, 1 office had 77 unprocessed checks that were unsecured and accessible to office staff.

• 36 (41.4 percent) scanned and profiled mail within 5 business days of receipt, as required. The remaining 51 offices, on average, scanned and profiled mail within 10 business days of receipt. ...

New Allegations Against Social Security Inspector General

     From Federal News Network (emphasis added):

House Democrats are reigniting an investigation into Department of Homeland Security Inspector General Joseph Cuffari’s use of taxpayer dollars to settle claims of retaliation by his former top deputy.

And lawmakers are also probing whether the Social Security Administration’s inspector general inappropriately referred Cuffari to her former law firm in connection with the retaliation investigation. A spokeswoman for the SSA IG called the assertions “blatantly inaccurate.” ...

DHS OIG spent $1.4 million on a 2020 contract with law firm WilmerHale to conduct an investigation into allegations of misconduct by Costello and other former employees. The investigation ultimately did not substantiate any allegations of illegal misconduct.

[Jamie] Raskin [House Oversight and and Accountability Ranking Member] is now investigating the role SSA Inspector General Gail Ennis may have played in the DHS OIG’s decision to contract with WilmerHale. Ennis was a partner at WilmerHale before becoming SSA IG in January 2019.

In deposition before the Merit Systems Protection Board, Cuffari said he asked Ennis to have her office conduct the investigation. Ennis declined to take it on due to the high workload, Cuffari said.

Raskin is probing whether she had a role in advising Cuffari to select WilmerHale for the investigation.

“If true, this would appear to violate your ethics agreement, which shows that you were a partner at WilmerHale and continue to have an ongoing financial stake in the firm’s profitability,” Raskin wrote in a letter to Ennis today. “As a result, your referral to your former employer WilmerHale potentially represents a financial conflict of interest.”

 A spokeswoman for the SSA OIG told Federal News Network that “Inspector General Ennis looks forward to the opportunity to respond to Ranking Member Raskin to correct the blatantly inaccurate assertions made in the letter.” ...

SSAB Nominations Advance

     The Senate Finance Committee has scheduled a hearing for January 31 on four nominations, including these three to the Social Security Advisory Board:

• Andrew G. Biggs, of Oregon
• Kathryn Rose Lang, of Maryland
• Sharon Beth Lewis, of Oregon

Report On AI At Social Security

     Here's a piece by four researchers touting Social Security's progress in Artificial Intelligence. It's somewhat odd. Apparently, it hasn't been published unless you consider releasing it online as publication. It has no date on it. I don't see any source cited from after 2021 so this may be a few years old. I may not the one who should say this but I'm not sure if what they're calling "Artificial Intelligence" would generally be called "Artificial Intelligence" today.

A Tale Of Two Trust Funds

     Social Security has released information showing how its trust funds have done through the end of 2023. Here are summaries for the Old Age and Survivors Trust Fund and the Disability Insurance Trust fund for the last five years. You'll notice that they're heading in opposite directions. I expect that money will eventually be diverted from the Disability Insurance Trust Fund to the Old Age and Survivor's Trust Fund, not that it will be enough to make much difference.

Old-Age and Survivors Insurance
(Amounts in millions)

Calendar year	Total income	Total outgo	Net increase in asset reserves	Asset reserves at end of calendar year
2019	$917,873	$911,423	$6,450	$2,804,322
2020	968,348	960,954	7,394	2,811,716
2021	942,856	1,001,936	-59,080	2,752,636
2022	1,056,718	1,097,455	-40,737	2,711,899
2023	1,166,885	1,237,294	-70,409	2,641,490

Disability Insurance
(Amounts in millions)

Calendar year	Total income	Total outgo	Net increase in asset reserves	Asset reserves at end of calendar year
2019	$143,901	$147,876	$-3,974	$93,083
2020	149,748	146,260	3,488	96,570
2021	145,470	142,646	2,824	99,394
2022	165,063	146,470	18,594	117,988
2023	183,801	154,815	28,985	146,973

What About Occupational Information? Does Scientific Integrity Apply To That?

     From today's Federal Register:

The SSA is soliciting comments and suggestions from the public on the DRAFT Scientific Integrity Policy of the Social Security Administration (DRAFT SSA Scientific Integrity Policy). The DRAFT SSA Scientific Integrity Policy codifies expectations to preserve scientific integrity throughout SSA scientific activities, establishes key roles and responsibilities for those who will lead the agency’s scientific integrity program, and, as appropriate, establishes relevant reporting and evaluation mechanisms.

    Social Security uses occupational information in determining which disability claims to approve. The source it's using now mostly dates back to 1979! Everyone concedes that it's hopelessly out of date but they're still using it. They've been working on a replacement now for well over a decade but almost nothing has been released and the agency is extremely vague on what's going on and when they'll be finished. I'm not the only one who's convinced that they keep delaying releasing anything because the data doesn't jibe with what the agency wants it to say. I think they want to keep massaging the data until it says that they don't have to change who they're approving and who they're denying even a little bit. Am I being unfair to Social Security? They can always make a full release of the data collected to date and give a good explanation for the delay. Does anyone still believe that this remains a good faith effort to collect data?

A Poll

online polls

Social Security Disability Recipients Hit Hard By Covid

     From Health Affairs Scholar:

New data from the Social Security Administration suggest there were 260 000 excess deaths in the United States among current or former disability beneficiaries during the first 22 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. These beneficiaries accounted for 26% of all excess deaths in the United States during this period. ...

Social Security Needs More Offices In Rural Areas, Not Fewer

Bryan County, OK

     From Barriers and Communications Preferences of Rural Populations: A Scoping Review by Megan Henly, Shreya Paul, Debra Brucker, Andrew J. Houtenville, Kelly Nye-Lengerman and Stacia Bach

Key Findings:


Rural areas of the United States warrant separate attention when considering how to communicate information about federal programs in part because their geography affects how information can be shared effectively (remoteness results in greater distance between field offices and lower level of broadband internet access) and in part because rural communities have a higher representation of many program-eligible groups (e.g., those older than 65, those who have a disability, and those who are low-income).

Mode of program communication affects the likelihood of the information reaching the public. Traditionally, the Social Security Administration mailed statements to all workers. In addition, private-sector employers often trained new hires about funding their retirements during orientation. As both these forms of communication have been substantially reduced since 2011, the public’s knowledge of OASDI benefits has been low.

When considering the general shift toward online information dissemination, this is a particular concern for those in rural areas, people with disabilities, and groups with low digital literacy. Broadband access is not as ubiquitous in rural areas as it is in nonrural ones. Perhaps as a result, many who reside in rural places are digitally illiterate and would have difficulty navigate online. In addition, most federal websites do not meet federal accessibility guidelines, creating a barrier for those with disabilities.

Community context is important, particularly when considering program enrollment that may carry a stigma, such as SSI or food and energy assistance. Identifying local community partners who can provide technical assistance may help. For communities of particularly marginalized groups (e.g., the unhoused, those recently released from prison, low English proficiency individuals, and those with serious mental health disabilities), having dedicated staff trained in dealing with populations facing vulnerabilities may be particularly useful. ...

It's An Idea

    From The Case For Using Subsidies For Retirement Plans To Fix Social Security by Andrew Biggs and Alicia Munnell:

The U.S. Treasury estimates that the tax preference for employer-sponsored retirement plans and IRAs reduced federal income taxes by about $185-$189 billion in 2020, equal to about 0.9 percent of gross domestic product.1 However, the best evidence suggests that the federal tax preferences do little to increase retirement saving.  ...

The [report] concludes that it makes little sense to throw more and more taxpayer money at employer plans and IRAs. In fact, the case is strong for eliminating the current tax expenditures on retirement plans, and using the increase in tax revenues to address Social Security’s long-term financing shortfall. ...

    This doesn't appeal to me. It's very unlikely to pass. There aren't specific tax revenues involved, just a reduction in tax preferences. I'd be more in favor of dedicating revenues from the estate tax, excise taxes and tariffs to Social Security but I doubt that would be enough to matter much. It's becoming more and more obvious to me that the only solution to the long term funding shortfall is an infusion of general tax revenues. The things that people discuss, raising full retirement age and lifting the cap on wages covered by the FICA tax, even together, aren't nearly enough to solve the long term funding problem.

This Is What's Going On At Ground Level

    Here's a note made recently by an employee at my firm about a pending disability claim that may give you some idea of the state of service at Social Security :

TC [telephone call to] ____ DO [District Office] and she said there is an initial claim that has been sitting there since 7/14/2023. She is sending it to the CR [claims representative] Mr. ____ but he is off.

    In case you don't understand the context, the DO only takes the claims. They don't make medical determinations. Those are made at Disability Determination Services (DDS). Under normal circumstances -- which don't currently exist -- new claims are forwarded from the DO to DDS in a week or two. Even if there is some technical problem, the claim isn't supposed to be sitting at a DO for six months! 

    For this to happen there has to be no effective tickler system at the DO. I'm sure there's supposed to be one but it's broken down entirely under the enormous pressure of overwhelming workloads.

    I'm not even mad at the personnel involved because I have an idea of just how overwhelmed they are.  If a case happens to fall by the wayside now, we're just about at what I've described before as the "Not now. Not later. Not ever" stage of service. Problems aren't being straightened out.

    And please don't blame my firm. We've been trying for three months to find out what happened to the case. It's almost impossible to get anyone on the phone. There's no smart trick that solves cases like this. There's far too many of them. We're not supposed to be Social Security's tickler system anyway.

Electronic Payroll Data Proposed Regs Advance

     Social Security's proposed rules on Use of Electronic Payroll Data To Improve Program Administration have been approved by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). They can now be published in the Federal Register for public comments.

Disability Claims Filed And Awarded Increased Modestly In 2023

    Social Security has posted final numbers on disability claims and awards for calendar year 2023. With the pandemic tamped down to a level which permits most people to live normally, the number of disability claims filed and awarded increased modestly.

 

Number of applications
Field office                                                                           receipts	Initial DDS receipts

 

2009 .....	2,816,244	1,798,975
2010 .....	2,935,798	1,926,398
2011 .....	2,878,920	1,859,591
2012 .....	2,824,024	1,808,863
2013 .....	2,653,939	1,702,700
2014 .....	2,536,174	1,633,652
2015 .....	2,427,443	1,552,119
2016 .....	2,321,583	1,473,700
2017 .....	2,179,928	1,377,803
2018 .....	2,073,293	1,300,668
2019 .....	2,015,182	1,309,863
2020 .....	1,838,893	1,226,236
2021 .....	1,820,282	1,210,545
2022 .....	1,804,384	1,205,686
2023 .....	1,904,635	1,248,378

  

Number of Awards

2009 .....985,940
2010 .....1,052,551
2011 .....1,025,003
2012 .....979,973
2013 .....884,894
2014 .....810,973
2015 .....775,739
2016 .....744,268
2017 .....762,141
2018 .....733,879
2019 ....723,858
2020 .....648,121
2021 .....571,952
2022 .....543,445
2023 .....561,585

 

Some Thoughts On The New Commissioner

     I hope that the new Commissioner, Martin O'Malley, doesn't suffer from the illusion that his management skills will rescue the Social Security Administration. I'm not knocking his management skills which may be excellent. It's just that for literally decades Social Security's leadership labored under the belief that good management could overcome appropriations that declined in real dollars. They tried ever more desperately as service declined. The peak of this management hubris was former Commissioner Barnhart's ill-fated "plan" to overhaul the agency's hearing functions and make everything vastly better without additional funding. It sold well to Congressional committees who were happy to hear Barnhart promise to pull a rabbit out of a hat but her "plan" wasn't much of a plan to begin with -- more of a plan to develop a plan. Such as the "plan" was, it made no sense. All she was able to accomplish was to delay the complete collapse of her "plan" until after she left office. Let's not repeat that disaster.

    Please, Commissioner O'Malley, don't fall into the trap of believing that your management abilities will make a world of difference. They won't. 

    However, there is something O'Malley can do that would help, and that's lobbying. I have read the book written by the first head of what is today the Social Security Administration, Arthur Altmeyer, on The Formative Years Of Social Security. I don't recommend the book. I was expecting accounts of how a huge agency was built from the ground up, creating systems that to some extent must still exist. How did they make sure everyone got a Social Security number? How did they handle data processing at a time when the finest data processing equipment available (and there was some) was at the caveman level? How did they hire all the people needed? How did they record all the wages? How did they compute benefits? There is almost none of that in the book. Instead, the book is mostly a dry account of how Altmeyer lobbied Congress for legislation needed to complete the Social Security Act with additional benefits. Altmeyer was quite successful at this, although not successful enough to get disability benefits, which were added after he left office. Altmeyer must have mostly delegated actual management of the new agency to others while he did what was most needed and what he was best at. 

    There is no law requiring that a Social Security Commisisoner spend his or her time tied down with day to day operations. Let others who know the agency better do that. O'Malley should spend most of his time lobbying within the Administration and with Congress for better operational funding. That's where he's needed and where his skills can make a difference.

Operating Stats From Office Of Hearings Operations

 

Click on image to view full size

DeSantis Alleges "Massive" Social Security Disability Fraud

     From Florida Politics:

[Florida Governor] Ron DeSantis is sympathetic to people determined to be disabled by the Social Security Administration, but he’s not accepting all claims at face value.

“Either you’re disabled or you’re not,” DeSantis said Sunday in Iowa [where he was campaigning for President]. ...

“There are some people that will kind of fake being disabled then work and then they should, you know, whatever. But I do think that if somebody has a disability and it prevents them from reaching their full potential and they’re eligible fine. But if, then they can do some type of employment that could supplement, you know, I don’t think that that would be a bad thing and I think that’s a good incentive.’ ...

“Now there’s a lot of fraud in the program and I think that’s been a huge issue,” DeSantis said, calling the problem “just massive.”  ...

 

Social Security’s Immigration Problem

      You often hear about the terrible problems that immigrants cause for Social Security. They just GIVE them Social Security as soon as they cross the border! It’s killing Social Security! 

     The Motley Fool has an article up about the immigration problem that’s hurting Social Security — not enough immigrants.

Backlog Of ALJ Decisions

     Over the last few months there's been a dramatic increase in the wait time to receive a decision from an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) here in North Carolina. It affects multiple hearing offices. 

    I can't tell. Is this a national problem? Regional?

    What's behind this problem? I know that some decision writers were detailed to work with Disability Determination on the huge backlogs of initial and reconsideration determinations but this new backlog to receive an ALJ decision seems far beyond anything that could be explained by that.

    Why are they scheduling ALJ hearings if they can't get out decisions?

What Can Social Security Do About Overpayments If It Really Wants To?

     Recent press reports about the harshness of Social Security's treatment of overpayments remind me of the character Inspector Javert from Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. In the novel, Inspector Javert ruthlessly pursues the fugitive Jean Valjean. Javert's actions are strictly speaking legal but fundamentally unjust as a less rigid man than Javert would realize. 

    I think the attitude at the Social Security Administration has been that there's nothing they can do about overpayments other than to do everything possible to collect them and to put nearly the entire burden on claimants to appeal the overpayments or to seek out repayment schedules or waiver but what could they do if they really wanted to make overpayments less harsh? Below are some ideas that occur to me. They boil down to telling the agency to stop trying to be Inspector Javert. You don't have to administer the Social Security Act in the most harsh manner possible.

    Make a repayment schedule the default mode for collecting overpayments. One huge problem now is that Social Security's default mode in Title II cases is to seize 100% of the claimant's benefits until the overpayment is satisfied. This leads to disastrous situations for claimants who don't know where to turn. Some end up homeless. Many are subjected to huge amounts of stress. Yes, the notices tell claimants that they can appeal the overpayment and request waiver and also that that they can get a payment schedule but let's face it, a substantial number of Social Security claimants are functionally illiterate or so overwhelmed by their life circumstances that they can't comprehend any notice they receive. Notify claimants that unless they appeal or request waiver that their benefits will be reduced by a certain amount each month. That heads off the worst problems associated with overpayments. The statute says that Social Security must "decrease any payment" to an overpaid claimant but it doesn't say that the decrease must be 100% until the money is recovered. A repayment schedule is certainly a "decrease" in payment. The Title II regulations say that no benefit is payable until an overpayment is collected but gives the exception for cases where "withholding the full amount each month would defeat the purpose of Title II." There is no reason why this exception cannot be applied generally until the regulation is amended. There is nothing in the regulations requiring that an individual apply for a repayment schedule. The regulations say that a notice of an overpayment must include "an explanation of the availability of a different rate of withholding when full withholding is proposed" suggesting that there are cases where the notification will not say that less than 100% of benefits will be withheld.

    Invigorate the application of the statutory provision allowing waiver of overpayments when recovery would be "against equity and good conscience." Social Security has interpreted the "against equity and good conscience" provision almost out of existence. Let's apply it to these situations:

• Overpayments to those who had a representative payee at the time they were overpaid. Try to get the money from the representative payee but quit trying to collect it from those who were minors or under such disabilities that they needed a representative payee at the time they were overpaid. You will notice that many of the media pieces on Social Security overpayments feature those who were overpaid when they were children. These stories get reported exactly because they seem to be against equity and good conscience. Acknowledge that fact and act accordingly. Quit declaring overpayments in the first place to those who had a representative payee. Waive them for all existing cases.
• Very old overpayments. There is no statute of limitations on collection of overpayments by administrative offset. Cases where the Social Security Administration is trying to collect ancient overpayments are often featured in media pieces, again because these cases seem to be against equity and good conscience. Just adopt a policy that the agency regards attempts to collect debts older than 10 years as generally being "against equity and good conscience." Who cares that Congress didn't tell you explicitly that you can do this? They've told you that they expect you to administer the programs in a way that isn't "against equity and good conscience." Act accordingly.

    Give staff more discretion to waive overpayments without the claimant filing an application for waiver. Many times I see a demand that claimants provide detailed information about their financial situation on a waiver form when it's obvious that the overpayments will be waived. The waiver forms themselves are a deterrent to obtaining waiver. They're too long and difficult for many claimants. Dispense with the form when it's appropriate.

 

    I guess that Social Security has been wary of doing anything other than rabidly pursuing collection of overpayments because they've been concerned that the Inspector General (who always conflates overpayments with fraud) will criticize them. Who cares what this Inspector General has to say?

 

    By the way, many Social Security employees say that it's OK to treat overpaid individuals harshly because so many of them failed to properly report work activity. Really? What would make anyone confidant that all those claimants failed to report the work? Most overpaid claimants tell me that they did report the work but nothing was done about their report. Does anyone at the agency believe that records are routinely made of such work reports and that appropriate adjustments are made in a timely manner? I never see that happening. Never. The agency has a mess in its field offices and teleservice centers. Don't pretend that the agency is delivering service as it might have 50 years ago.

Homeless In Atlanta Due To Overpayment

    From WSB in Atlanta:

Denise Woods drives around Georgia strip malls, truck stops, and parking lots, looking for a safe place to sleep each night.

“It’s scary. You just don’t know what each day is going to bring,” Woods said.

Everything she owns is jammed into the back seat of her car.

According to a letter sent by the Social Security Administration, the agency is demanding back nearly $58,000 after determining it was overpaying her.

Because of her disability, Lupus, and congestive heart failure, she can only work part-time and makes just $14 per hour.

 So, the agency is withholding her entire monthly check - about $2,000 per month until February 2026. 

“I still don’t know how it happened,” said Woods, who has requested a waiver and is seeking a hearing. “No one will give me answers. It takes weeks or months to get a caseworker on the phone. They have made my life unbearable.” ...

    You can say that she really needs to work out a repayment schedule but she can't get anyone on the phone. Also, and more important, she doesn't know to ask. Yes, she gets notices but most claimants understand very little contained in any notice they receive from Social Security.

Representation Of Claimants Way Down In 2023

     From Social Security's FOIA Reading Room:

Click on image to view full size

Happy New Year!