OIG Report On ALJ Productivity

Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has issued a report on Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and hearing office productivity. The report tells us that higher producing ALJs approved a higher percentage of cases than lower producing ALJs and that an increased percentage of on the record reversals, that is approvals without a hearing, accounted for a good part of that difference. Higher producing ALJs also held shorter hearings.

The report tells us that a higher ratio of staff to ALJ helped produce more decisions. Commissioner Astrue had stated back in June that "We have also received some criticism that we are not providing adequate support staff for our administrative law judge corps. In my opinion, that is a fiction designed to sidetrack some of our productivity initiatives." That statement, which was not off the cuff, but in Astrue's written statement to a Congressional committee is not looking too good at the moment.

Here is an excerpt from the report worth quoting:

ALJs stated that the electronic folder has slowed case processing. While some ALJs indicated the slowdown is a result of the learning curve associated with the electronic folder, other ALJs assert that processing cases with the electronic folder will always be slower than with paper files. Specifically, some ALJs stated that it is faster to page through a paper file than navigate through the screens and documents attached in the electronic folder. ODAR has confirmed that there are general intermittent systems performance issues, such as limited bandwidth causing periods of slow response times. However, because the problems are intermittent, documentation of these occurrences was not available from ODAR. Information was not available for us to determine the impact the electronic folder has had on case processing times.

Why is it that this is the first official report from Social Security discussing this topic? Why is it that they lack sufficient information? It is like they have been afraid to try to find out whether the electronic folder is working. After this length of time the lack of proof that the electronic folder has improved productivity is rather powerful proof to me that it is not working. If the electronic folder were succeeding, Social Security would be quick to gather proof of the success and to tell the world.

Let me ask the question that OIG did not try to ask or answer. Where would Social Security be today if the money lavished upon the electronic folder contractors had been spent on additional employees to get the work done? The answer is obvious. The backlog at Social Security would be vastly smaller, maybe even non-existent.

I nominate the electronic folder as the worst single decision in the history of the Social Security Administration and Jo Anne Barnhart as the worst Commissioner in Social Security history.

A Question

Why have we not heard anything recently about the effects of the EDIB electronic disability file upon Social Security's productivity? EDIB was supposed to create large productivity gains for the Social Security Administration. We heard early on that EDIB was hurting productivity, but there was a reasonable argument that the productivity losses were nothing more than normal startup problems.

EDIB is past the initial startup. If there are productivity gains from EDIB, they should be showing up. One would think that if there had been productivity gains that the Social Security Administration would have been quick to get the word out. One would also think that we would have heard a good deal about the effects of EDIB on Social Security productivity from Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) and from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about productivity under EDIB, but we have heard nothing.

Why the silence?

Beta Test Of Electronic Submission Of Disability Claims By Third Parties

From an announcement by the Social Security Administration:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) is pleased to announce that, in 2008, the agency will develop and implement a Beta test of a web service which will allow the submission of Initial-level claims, including Disability applications and Adult Disability Reports, from companies who assist the public with filing for benefits.

In 2008, SSA plans to develop the web service to initially collect data on the Internet Social Security Benefit Application and Disability Report. Note that when a third party submits an application, SSA must contact the claimant before it is considered valid. In the initial phase, organizations will be able to submit claims data in bulk and receive a confirmation of receipt of the submitted data. In subsequent phases, the systems interface will also include the ability for organizations to check on the status of previously submitted claims information.

SSA would like to extend an invitation to companies who assist individuals with their Social Security benefit applications, to participate in this web service claims data exchange Beta test. The Beta test is structured to use the "consolidator" model, where the participating company serves as a conduit to receive claims data from their client base and electronically transfer the data to SSA.

After the initial disability claims data collection effort in 2008 is evaluated, SSA will add functional capabilities in future years to collect data on electronic appeal forms and integrated claims applications. This multi-year initiative will provide a comprehensive systems interface for companies to send claims data (including Title II Retirement and Spouse application data, disability data, and medical evidence) to SSA on behalf of their clients. The envisioned long-range solution beyond 2008 is a web service that will facilitate the collection of data through the entire life-cycle of Internet applications, including Title II and Title XVI initial claims and appeals.

Computerworld Honors For eDIB

Computerworld has added eDIB, the paperless system that the Social Security Administration is now implementing, to the list of those it honors for achievement.

It appears to me that Social Security must have exaggerated the achievements of eDIB to the point of complete dishonesty to get this award. Fully operational? Saving money? Most effective system of its type? Achieved its goal? The "grapevine" in Social Security fully supports eDIB?

Some excerpts from Computerworld:

In 2006, SSA completed the rollout of an $800 million all-digital system known as eDib to process disability claims at nearly 1,500 locations nationwide. eDib will save more than $1.3 billion when compared with the cost of creating, mailing and storing paper folders. The eDib system allows applicants to file claims over the Internet directly or with the help of SSA staff at one of its offices. ...

For SSA employees, eDib has:

• Significantly reduced the amount of time spent searching for folders and associating folder documentation
• Eliminated the need to reconstruct lost folders
• Eliminated the need to prepare a paper folder for routing to the DDS
• Eliminated the need to store a paper-based claims folder
• Provided immediate access to claim files for appeals or post-entitlement processing
• Reduced the amount of time lost on misrouted cases
• Allowed for the propagation of data to various systems ...

Is it the first, the only, the best or the most effective application of its kind? Most effective

Success

Has your project achieved or exceeded its goals? Achieved

Is it fully operational? Yes

How many people benefit from it? 2M/year ...

How quickly has your targeted audience of users embraced your innovation? Or, how rapidly do you predict they will?
... But once they adapted, “selling” the value of eDib to other employees was easier than expected as our field office employees have an incredibly accurate and rapid “grapevine.”