Computing The SSA CLD Score

The Social Security Administration's new Listing for End Stage Liver Disease includes the following formula for computing what the agency is calling the SSA CLD (Social Security Administration Chronic Liver Disease) score:

9.57 x [Log_e(serum creatinine mg/dL)]

+3.78 x [Log_e(serum total bilirubin mg/dL)]

+11.2 x [Log_e(INR)]
+6.43

If your score is 22 or greater, you meet the Listing.

For non-math majors, which includes the vast majority of attorneys and physicians, this is not so easy to compute. I see no sign that anyone other than the Social Security Administration is using this formula.

I would guess that someone, somewhere has put together a spread sheet or something such to simplify this computation. What is the Social Security Administration telling Disability Examiners and physicians about computing this? Has the agency given its own personnel or state agency personnel anything to help with this computation? Is there anything that anyone can share?

Mississippi Office Recognized

From the Delta Democrat Times of Greenville, Mississippi:

Fast, accurate work delivered with a positive attitude has earned the Greenville Social Security Administration District Office the Outstanding Level One Field Office of the Year for Fiscal Year 2007.

The Greenville office was selected for the honor over 120 other offices in the seven states of the Atlanta Region, according to Regional Commissioner Paul Barnes, who presented the award to Bill Allen, Greenville director, on Tuesday in the federal building. ...

Allen said he owes the success of the office to employees who have been with him for many years. One of the 20 employees at the Greenville office, Joyce Boykin, service representative, was there when Allen arrived 36 years ago. He has been with the Social Security Administration for a total of 46 years and says he has no plans to retire.

“I enjoy coming to work every day and I enjoy the interaction with the community that our job requires,” Allen said.

Barnes said this is the second time that the Greenville office has won this award. The office received the award in 2002.

“It's unusual to win it at all, but to win it two times is really quite remarkable,” Barnes said.

Waiting In Idaho

From KIDX in Idaho:

This is 45-year-old Susan Mattson.

She's worked for over 27 years at Basic American Foods in Shelly.

Susan's survived two aneurysms and several seizures.

But she may soon loose her home and a farm that's been in the family for 137 years.
Susan Mattson: "The week of my brain aneurysm I had almost 100 thousand Dollars saved and 55 thousand dollars worth of cattle. The cattle are gone and the savings is almost gone."

Her medical conditions have cost her almost everything she has, not to mention her health.

Susan Mattson: "An average day for me is very very painful, depressing and most of all I hate my government."

She's been turned down for Social Security disability three times now and has filed for a federal judge to hear her appeal.

The one-time athlete has never taken advantage of the system

And she has one question.

Susan Mattson: "Why do I continue to be denied government disability? Why? I want someone to tell me why."

One doctor has sent letters and medical records to the government on her behalf since 2006.

Dr. William Domarad: "I see her for an ongoing neurological condition for which she takes medicines every day."

Susan also suffers from chronic rheumatoid arthritis and has had hip replacement surgery twice.
Dr. William Domarad: "I believe that she should qualify for disability. I believe that she's disabled."

Susan has survived having her right hip replaced twice, a broken back and a many other injuries.

She continues work full-time at the potato processing plant and looks forward to the day when she'll get an answer to her question.

Social Security Officials would not comment on her case.

Yes, I know. If she has been working full time all along, she is supposed to be denied. Probably, she has not been working the entire time. That is one of the problems with the lengthy delays at Social Security. Claimants make efforts, sometimes heroic, to go back to work. Usually, the claimants cannot sustain the employment. Occasionally, the employment is deleterious to the claimant's health. It can often be a significant complication to the Social Security disability claim.

Call 11 For Action Wants To Help, But Can't

From WTOL in Toledo:

She can't walk. She can't drive. She says she can't even work. Now her only source of income has been taken away, and she can't afford to live.

In desperate need of help, this west Toledo woman is turning to Call 11 for Action Problem Solver Mika Highsmith. ...

Turner was getting by on social security benefits, which were a little more than 600 dollars a month. But this past November, Turner got a letter saying it was her last check. And the reason? "They said because I wasn't disabled," she tells News 11.

Turner says she re-applied immediately, but has yet to get an answer. "I got a letter saying I'd hear something within 100 days. It's been five months."

Now this 52-year-old woman who has already lost so much is about to lose everything. "I'm four months behind on rent. My light bill is 400 dollars. They're about to turn off my phone on the 16." ...

Problem Solver Highsmith spoke with a rep from social security. She said you have to be re-certified every one, three or five years.

When it's your turn you'll get a letter in the mail. If you're denied, you have ten days to file an appeal for payment continuation. After that, you have 60 days to make an appeal without pay.

In this case, the rep says she can't give specifics due to privacy laws, but says she looking into the situation.

Rep Payee Outfit Leaves 600 In Limbo

From the Arizona Star:

Up to 600 elderly and disabled Tucsonans found their Social Security checks in limbo Tuesday after the company managing their funds abruptly shut its doors.

While the Social Security Administration is investigating SCOPE Payee Services, 524 N. Sixth Ave., its owners, Robert L. and Gary A. Skaggs, are nowhere to be found. ...

Since 2003, SCOPE has managed Social Security checks for the elderly and disabled [what Social Security calls a representative payee]. The non-profit functioned as a guardian, of sorts, receiving the checks and paying bills, like rent, for people who were not able to manage their own finances. The agency also distributed portions of the checks to the beneficiaries for day-to-day living expenses. ...

[C]ourt and state Corporation Commission documents suggest SCOPE and its predecessor, Specialized Creative Opportunities for Personal Environments, which also worked for the disabled and disadvantaged, were on collective shaky financial ground for years. ...

The Corporation Commission twice revoked the company's incorporation standing for failure to submit annual reports and pay appropriate fees. But the commission reinstated the company both times before dissolving it for good in 1998.

In October 1995, the company filed for corporate bankruptcy, but it continued to operate.

The U.S. Attorney's Office also filed a civil suit against Robert Skaggs and the company for unpaid 1996 income taxes and other payments. In March 2007, a federal judge signed an order for Robert Skaggs to pay $166,266.

Immigrants Help Social Security

From a New York Times editorial:

Immigration is good for the financial health of Social Security because more workers mean more tax revenue. Illegal immigration, it turns out, is even better than legal immigration. In the fine print of the 2008 annual report on Social Security, released last week, the program’s trustees noted that growing numbers of “other than legal” workers are expected to bolster the program over the coming decades.

One reason is that many undocumented workers pay taxes during their work lives but don’t collect benefits later. Another is that undocumented workers are entering the United States at ever younger ages and are expected to have more children while they’re here than if they arrived at later ages.

LTD Carriers Choking Social Security?

From the New York Times:

The Social Security system is choking on paperwork and spending millions of dollars a year screening dubious applications for disability benefits, according to lawsuits filed by whistle-blowers.

Insurance companies are the source of the problem, the lawsuits say. The insurers are forcing many people who file disability claims with them to also apply to Social Security — even people who clearly do not qualify for the government program. ...

The policies they sell allow them to coordinate their benefit payments with others to make sure no one is paid twice. Thus, if a disabled person can get benefits from somewhere else — like workers’ compensation, a disability pension or Social Security — the insurance company can reduce the benefit check by that amount.

The flood of referrals, however, is making it hard for Social Security to respond to people who are truly disabled, said Kenneth D. Nibali, the former top administrator of the Social Security disability program.

“Anybody who is forced to come into this system, and who doesn’t need to be there, is affecting someone else,” said Mr. Nibali, who retired in 2002 and is serving as an expert witness for the plaintiffs. “They’re holding up cases for the people who have been waiting for months and years, who in many cases are much worse off.” ...

The Social Security Administration is not an active participant in the lawsuits and declined to comment on them. A spokesman, Mark Lassiter, said Social Security does not keep track of how many of its roughly 2.5 million annual applicants for disability are referred by insurance companies. But he cited academic research showing that 18 percent acknowledged privately that they were unqualified, because they could still work. “It is probable that many of these claimants were required to apply,” Mr. Lassiter said. ...

Forcing people who are injured to apply for Social Security before paying their claims appears to bolster insurers’ profits in several ways. If claimants refuse to apply, the insurers can simply stop paying their benefits, said Dawn Barrett, an employee of the Cigna Corporation, who grew frustrated sending people to Social Security and who is now a plaintiff in one of the lawsuits. More typically, she said, people apply for Social Security when an insurer tells them to. That allows the insurer to reduce its claim reserves, money that is kept in conservative investments for benefit payments. And in the insurance industry, smaller reserves mean bigger profits. ...

Mr. Nibali has calculated that it costs $1,180, on average, to process a single Social Security disability application to the first decision, usually a rejection. If the applicant persists through the first three levels — the initial review, a reconsideration and a hearing by an administrative law judge — the case will cost the system an average of $4,759, he found.

I am quite ready to criticize Unum and other Long Term Disability (LTD) insurers because I have a low opinion of them, but I do not understand the cause of action here, that is the basis for this lawsuit, nor am I buying the theory that LTD insurers are a cause of Social Security's backlogs. While there may be occasional cases where LTD carriers waste everyone's time with Social Security disability claims that have no chance of being approved, I have seen no sign that this is any real problem. There are plenty of hopeless claims filed by people who have no LTD involvement. In the main, insurers have good reason to recommend that LTD recipients file claims for Social Security disability benefits and pursue those claims aggressively. This benefits the insurance company, but it also benefits the claimants. My experience is that disability claims filed by LTD recipients have a high chance of success. Unless there is something to this lawsuit that I do not understand, I see nothing abusive about LTD insurers pressing LTD recipients to file Social Security disability claims. I think it is absurd to suggest that LTD insurers are in any real way responsible for the backlogs at Social Security. The only blame I would assign to LTD insurers is that they have done almost no lobbying to get the Social Security Administration a larger budget so it can process its cases.

Tax Cuts Compared To Social Security Shortfall

From the non-partisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:

The Social Security trustees’ report issued this week estimates that Social Security faces a total shortfall over the next 75 years of 0.56 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This is slightly less than the estimated cost over that same period of extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts just for the top 1 percent of households: 0.6 percent of GDP.[i] (Currently, households in the top 1 percent make more than $450,000 per year.)

This striking fact should serve as a much-needed “reality check” in discussions over entitlement programs and the nation’s long-term fiscal future. Too often, such discussions assume that Social Security faces a titanic shortfall that will require radical restructuring of the program, while paying little or no attention to the enormous fiscal damage that would result from extending the tax cuts without paying for them.