NC Furloughs State Employees But Exempts DDS

North Carolina Governor Beverly Perdue has just announced a furlough of state employees, but has limited it to those "whose salaries are paid in whole or in part from moneys appropriated" by the state, thus exempting employees of the North Carolina Disability Determination Service, (DDS) who make initial and reconsideration determinations on Social Security disability claims, since their salaries are paid for by the federal government.

Update: Perdue's order seems clear to me, but employees at NC DDS remain uncertain about whether the furlough will affect them.

Plans Old And New

The written statements for yesterday's Social Security Subcommittee hearing are available online. Here are a few excerpts:

Mary Glenn-Croft, Deputy Commissioner for Budget, Finance and Management, Social Security Administration:

We will use a significant portion of this funding to hire and train new employees and to provide additional overtime so that we can process critical workloads. ...

• Our field operations will hire 1,500 employees in local field offices, teleservice centers, and processing centers;

• Our hearings offices will hire 550 new employees and 35 additional administrative law judges, and

• State disability determination services (DDS) throughout the country will hire 300 additional disability examiners.

Robert Hewell, Acting Deputy Commissioner, Public Building Service, General Services Administration

[Schedule for new National Computer Center]:

• Site Acquisition: 2nd quarter FY2010
• Design-build contract awarded: 2nd quarter FY2011
• Construction completion: 1st quarter FY2014

Valerie Melvin, Director of Information Management and Human Capital Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office:

Finally, a number of initiatives undertaken by SSA to improve the disability process and potentially remedy backlogs have faltered for a variety of reasons, including poor planning and execution. In fact, some initiatives had the effect of slowing processing times by reducing staff capacity, increasing the number of appeals, or complicating the decision process. Several other initiatives improved the process, but were too costly and subsequently abandoned. This was the case for several facets of a major 1997 initiative, known as the “Disability Process Redesign,” which sought to streamline and expedite disability decisions for both initial claims and appeals. In the past, we reported that various initiatives within this effort became problematic and were largely discontinued due to their ineffectiveness and high cost. Further, implementation of an electronic system enhanced some aspects of the disability claims process, but also caused delays due to systemic instability and shutdowns at the DDS and hearings offices.9 Further, the “Hearings Process Improvement” initiative, implemented in 2000, involved reorganizing hearing office staff and responsibilities with the goal of reducing the number of appeals. However, many of the senior SSA officials we spoke with expressed the opinion that this initiative left key workloads unattended and was therefore responsible for dramatic increases in delays and processing times at the hearings level.

[Is it churlish to point out that GAO was a cheerleader for all of these ill-considered plans?]

Update: The GAO report originally linked on the Social Security Subcommittee website was for the GAO testimony at the Social Security Subcommittee hearing in March. They have now updated their website to correctly link to the testimony delivered yesterday. This GAO report is extremely preliminary.

Sylvester J. Schieber, Chairman, Social Security Advisory Board

You might wonder why I would suggest that many in the American public would find taking five years or more to build a new computer center and another two to three years to get the operating equipment in place as laughable. I do not believe that most people would consider the five-to-eight-year time frame involved would reflect the urgency this project deserves given the national dependence on this agency. I do not believe that most people would accept that we could not do this on a more timely basis if we were truly committed to the task.

Employment Numbers

Below are the December 2008 figures for the number of employees at Social Security, recently released by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), along with earlier figures for comparison purposes. It is interesting that the figure remains almost identical to what it was in December 2006, shortly after the election that made Democrats the majority party in both houses of Congress.

• December 2008 63,733
  
• September 2008 63,990
  
• June 2008 63,622
  
• March 2008 60,465
  
• December 2007 61,822
• September 2007 62,407
• June 2007 62,530
• March 2007 61,867
• December 2006 63,410
• September 2006 63,647
• September 2005 66,147
• September 2004 65,258
• September 2003 64,903
• September 2002 64,648
• September 2001 65,377
• September 2000 64,521
• September 1999 63,957
• September 1998 65,629

Furloughs Worthless

From the Central Jersey Courier News:

State officials have done the right thing in taking a hard line pushing through once-a-month furloughs of state workers.

But the goal of the furloughs is supposed to be saving money. So why is the program also swallowing up the state workers paid with federal funds? Those furloughs won't save the state a dime.

Officials have said only that it's a "policy decision," which can be translated as, "We don't have a reason we want to tell you, so stop questioning us." ...

Even the feds don't want the furloughs. The Social Security Administration, for instance, has requested exemptions in New Jersey and other states for the state workers it pays to evaluate disability claims. ...

We urge exemptions from furloughs for those state workers paid with federal funds.

Time Will Tell How Significant This Moment Is

This broadcast e-mail went out earlier today from David Foster the Deputy Commissioner for Social Security's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR) to all ODAR employees:

Date: April 27, 2009

Subject: Tipping the Backlog

It is my pleasure to report to you that this month, we turned the corner on the disability backlog. We started the year with a pending of 760,813 cases and we ended April at 756,107 cases. My congratulations to everyone.

I will be asking the office managers to find a way to celebrate this moment. While we are still a far cry from moving the disability backlog to 466,000 cases, these moments come rarely and they must be enjoyed.

Great job! David

Wintess List For Congressional Hearing

The House Social Security Subcommittee announced the following witness list for its hearing on Tuesday, April 28 on Social Security's implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA):

• Mary Glenn-Croft, Deputy Commissioner for Budget, Finance and Management, Social Security Administration
• Rob Hewell, Acting Deputy Commissioner, Public Buildings Service, United States General Services Administration
• The Honorable Patrick O’Carroll, Inspector General, Social Security Administration
• Valerie Melvin, Director of Information Management and Human Capital Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office
• Sylvester J. Schieber, Chairman, Social Security Advisory Board

Schieber has already posted what appears to be his written statement or at least an attachment for his written statement on the Social Security Advisory Board (SSAB) website. The title is "Bridging the Gap: Improving SSA’s Public Service through Technology." This is in line with Schieber's apparent belief that the way to solve Social Security's service delivery problems is by investing in technology.

I certainly agree that Social Security needs technological improvement, but it seems obvious at ground level that the only thing that will solve Social Security's service delivery problem is more manpower. We have not seen much from the SSAB about Social Security's manpower needs. This seems unbalanced and misleading to me.

It is interesting that there will be a witness from the Public Buildings Service at General Services Administration (GSA). If Social Security is going to hire many more personnel, it is going to need to lease additional office space. GSA does this for the federal government. GSA has a longstanding reputation for being incredibly slow at acquiring office space.

Union Newsletter

Council 220 of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), a labor union which represents most Social Security employees, has posted its March 2009 newsletter. It contains articles about::

• The union's hopes for the Obama Administration
• The union's problems with some Social Security managers and policies,
• A dinner in honor of the 50th year of service of Jim Marshall, who is head of AFGE Council 215 which represents most employees of Social Security's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR)
• Bonuses paid to Social Security management.

SSAB On SGA

The Social Security Advisory Board (SSAB) has issued an "Issue Brief" on the subject of Substantial Gainful Activity (SGA), a concept used in the Social Security disability programs. Basically, if one is engaging in SGA, one cannot be considered disabled, but SGA is a term of art. Work may not be SGA if low earnings, unsuccessful work attempts, made work, subsidized employment, impairment related work expenses, trial work periods, etc. are taken into consideration. And don't get me started on self-employment as SGA or the effect of blindness on SGA.

There has been a consensus for some years that the whole concept of SGA needs a fresh look. One of the more common themes is that SGA should be a ramp instead of a cliff. I don't know how to quickly explain the ramp-cliff distinction but if you've read this far, you probably already know what I'm talking about. Despite the consensus, nothing has been done about SGA since doing something will probably mean more people will get on or stay on Social Security disability benefits. That costs money,which didn't appeal to either President Bush or Clinton.

Other than discussing the bizarre aspect of how blindness affects SGA the "Issue Brief" is mostly superficial, but still useful, since it does point to an area of the law that is long overdue for reform, at a time when reform may be politically feasible.

One suggestion: The biggest problem now is that SGA is just too complicated. Claimants have no idea how it works. Even many Social Security employees what should understand how SGA works, don't. The best work incentives imaginable won't work if claimants don't understand them and Social Security has great difficulty administering them. The first goal should be simplification. Going to a ramp instead of a cliff will help, but that would just be a start.