Firms As Representatives Coming And Representative ID Number Too

Under the Privacy Act Social Security must publish notices of new systems of record keeping or alterations to existing systems of records. Here are some excerpts from a notice just published by Social Security -- and note the representative number, which sounds minor to some, but attorneys and others representing Social Security claimants have been very unhappy with using their Social Security numbers as a unique identifier:

We are altering the Appointed Representative File system of records specifically to implement an online suite of services for representatives. The online services will enable us to establish a framework of new business processes and systems enhancements and to provide comprehensive online services for representatives who wish to perform services on behalf of our claimants.

To ensure that we administer the appointed representative business process in a more efficient and effective manner, we propose to: ... (3) expand the category of records we maintain in the system to include the representative's date of birth, cell phone information, and representative identification number ...

Our long-standing policy is to recognize only persons as representatives. However, in the decades since we adopted that policy, the business practices of claimants' representatives have changed significantly. For example, many claimants prefer to hire a firm rather than a single person within a firm. Accordingly, to provide claimants better flexibility in pursuing matters before us, starting in 2010, we will recognize firms and other professional entities as representatives.

No Pressures, Goals or Quotas For ALJs -- According To SSA Spokesman

From the Buffalo News (emphasis added):

The Social Security Administration is making some progress in its efforts to cut the backlog of disability cases in Buffalo and other offices.

But not enough progress, according to Social Security Administration judges who came to Buffalo for a conference this week.

Many people with serious illnesses or injuries still wait two years or more to get a hearing, and the judges say that is a source of frustration.

“People deserve the right to have their cases heard within a reasonable amount of time. The current waiting time is not acceptable,” said Marilyn Zahm, an administrative law judge in the Buffalo district.

“I once received a letter from a family member of a man who waited for a long time for his case to be heard, and before it could be heard, the man died,” said Randy Frye, an administrative law judge from Charlotte, N. C. “It made me feel terrible. . . . That just shouldn’t happen.”

Frye is the president and Zahm the vice president of the Association of Administrative Law Judges, a national union of judges that held an educational conference Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. About 130 judges attended the event in the Hyatt Regency Buffalo.

The two officials said the system in which they work is in a “crisis.” According to the judges, the long wait for hearings is only one of several serious problems that affect a system on which millions of Americans depend.

Among the other problems, according to the judges:

• Far too many applicants — about two of every three — are turned down, sometimes for no logical reason, when they first apply. Later — only after months of waiting and having to hire attorneys — most of those people are approved for disability.

• The system has little or no flexibility. The judges are required to approve disability pay for life to a person who, in their opinion, should receive it for a year or two.

• They are pressured by Social Security Administration officials to rush cases through the system, when, in some cases, they would like to spend more time researching a case in the best interest of taxpayers and applicants.

“Right now, the only pressure we get from Washington is to push the cases through the system,” Frye said. “That seems to be the only priority.”

Mark Hinkle, a national spokesman for the Social Security Administration, disagreed. He noted that 7.5 million Americans and their dependents now received $106 billion a year in Social Security disability benefits.

“There are no pressures, goals or quotas for judges. We’re just trying to do the best job we can for the American public,” Hinkle said. “I don’t think you’ll find anyone who feels that the waiting times are acceptable.”

Social Security Bulletin Released

The Social Security Administration has released another issue of the Social Security Bulletin, its scholarly periodical.

The Human Cost Of Backlogs

From an Op Ed piece by Fran Quigley in the Indianapolis Star (emphasis added):

Do you know which American minority group experiences poverty at the greatest rate? Hint: It is not an ethnic minority.

A new report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research shows that nearly two-thirds of working-age adults stuck in long-term poverty have one or more disabilities. ...

From my own work at Indiana Legal Services, I can rattle off grim examples of clients living in tormenting physical and psychological pain because they cannot afford to buy medicine their physicians have prescribed for them. Others endure years of destitute poverty waiting for a disability hearing to be scheduled in the shamefully backlogged Social Security Administration appeal system.

They Call It "Conflicting Goals" -- I Call It Bureaucracy At Its Worst

From a recent report by Social Security's Office of Inspector General (OIG) on Aged Claims At The Hearing Level (emphasis added):

In our interviews, one Regional Chief ALJ [Administrative Law Judge] stated that conflicting timeliness goals in the past contributed to hearing offices ignoring the oldest claims. For instance, during FY [Fiscal Year] 2002, ODAR [Office of Disability Adjudication and Review] set timeliness goals for percent of claims processed in 180 days and 270 days. This observation is consistent with comments made during earlier audits. In 2003, during audit work on best practices at hearing offices, an OCALJ [Office of Chief ALJ] official noted that the hearing offices were facing competing goals on dispositions and timeliness. Since aged claims could take more time to process, they would be put aside to allow an office to process more claims and meet shorter timeliness goals. This official questioned the logic of having goals that ran counter to the “oldest claims first” approach. Our review of Agency reports found examples of this focus on shorter-term goals, such as a FY 2002 annual report stating, “Of the more than 532,000 claims processed, we decided nearly 18 percent within 180 days of the request for hearing, slightly below our 20 percent goal.”

New Malignant Neoplastic Disease Listings

Social Security has published new final listings for malignant neoplastic diseases, which are known to most people as cancer. There are only very minor changes from the current listings.

This Will Be A Big Contract

From a notice posted by Social Security:

... [T]he Social Security Administration is publishing this pre-solicitation synopsis notifying interested parties of its intent to release an RFP for the development of a new common Disability Case Processing System (DCPS). ...

The new common DCPS will support SSA's disability workload which consumes over half of SSA's operational work years and is the most complex component of its programs. ...

There are 54 state and federal disability determination case processing sites located throughout the United States and its territories. The system environments consist of locally administered and maintained legacy software and associated hardware. These systems are primarily derivatives of five core systems, which have been built over time by various organizations, and have been significantly customized to meet local management needs.

The purpose of the solicitation will be to replace the five disability determination case processing systems into a single system. The proposed new Disability Case Processing System will be implemented using Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) principles and methods, and will incorporate services, which will be available for use Enterprise wide. ...

SSA anticipates an award of an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Labor Hour type contract. The period of performance shall be for one base year and five-one year options. Work under this proposed contract will be performed through the issuance of firm fixed price or labor hour type task orders, with fixed hourly rates based on the labor categories in the contract.

New Hearing Notices

From Social Security Update, a publication of the Social Security Administration:

Commissioner Astrue is committed to improving the clarity, quality, and readability of all correspondence from Social Security. To that end, Social Security recently began using a new, more user-friendly Notice of Hearing, aimed at helping claimants better prepare for their hearings before an administrative law judge.

There are several improvements in the new notice. First, it tells claimants at the beginning that they must bring valid picture identification because of security requirements in government facilities. This is important because claimants without required identification would have to reschedule their hearings for a later date causing an unnecessary delay.

The notice’s new language makes it easier to understand the legal information by eliminating provisions that can be complicated and confusing. And the new notice reflects changes in the law, including specific issues related to a claimant’s appeal. These items are now presented in order of importance.

For more information about disability hearings and appeals, visit www.socialsecurity.gov/appeals.