When Will They Ever Learn?

     From a "Policy Futures" paper by Kathleen Romig for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP):

The October 2015 budget agreement extended the solvency of the Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) trust fund into 2022 and renewed the Social Security Administration’s (SSA’s) authority to conduct demonstration projects, allowing the agency to test ideas to encourage work among DI beneficiaries and applicants.  This creates an opportunity to build further evidence on the efficacy of various ideas to encourage work among this population. 

New demonstrations will likely produce only limited results, however.  SSA has conducted many work-incentive experiments over the past 25 years, and none has led to a significant number of beneficiaries earning enough to support themselves and leave DI.  This result should not come as a surprise.  DI’s eligibility criteria are strict.  Few DI beneficiaries are able to work.  Still fewer are likely to be able to return to self-supporting work on a sustained basis. ...

TABLE 1

SSA Work-Incentive Experiments Have Shown Only Limited Results
Demonstration	Years	Description	Effects
Benefit Offset National Demonstration (BOND)	2009-2017	Testing a $1-for-$2 benefit offset for earnings above SGA level, with additional work supports for “Phase 2” beneficiaries	Small effects on earnings (Phase 2 only) Increased benefit payments
Accelerated Benefits Demonstration	2004-2011	Provided health care to DI beneficiaries during 24-month waiting period for Medicare, with additional medical and work supports for “AB Plus” beneficiaries	Improved health outcomes Negligible effect on employment For AB Plus, greater use of return-to-work services, but some evidence employment effects are temporary
Mental Health Treatment Study	2003-2011	Provided medical and employment supports to beneficiaries with schizophrenia or affective disorders	Improved employment and earnings Improved mental health status No impact on earnings above SGA No impact on benefits
Benefit Offset: Four-State Pilot	2003-2009	Replaced “cash cliff” with a $1-for-$2 offset for earnings above SGA level, with additional work supports	Small increase in earnings above SGA No effect on mean earnings No effect on employment Effects varied by participant subgroup
Youth Transition Demonstration	2001-2014	Waived SSI income and asset rules, provided state-designed employment and education supports for young DI and SSI beneficiaries	Little to no effect on employment and earnings SSA periodically revisiting outcomes
Ticket to Work	1999-present	Provides vocational rehabilitation and work support from employment networks (Ticket to Work is a change in law, not a demonstration)	Increased use of return-to-work services Little effect on employment Little effect on benefits
State Partnership Initiative	1998-2006	Tested variety of state-designed interventions, including Medicaid waivers and employment services for DI and SSI beneficiaries	Small and mixed effects on employment No effect — or negative effect — on earnings
Project NetWork	1991-1999	Offered intensive outreach, work-incentive waivers, and case management services to DI and SSI applicants and recipients	Small short-term effect on earnings No effect on benefits

Attorneys Needed For Fee-Generating Federal Court Cases

     Claimants caught up in the Eric Conn mess in Kentucky and West Virginia are now receiving decisions from Administrative Law Judges (ALJs). About half are winning. The early signs are that the Appeals Council is fast-tracking appeals from those who were denied. Claimant are receiving decisions from the Appeals Council in less than a month. If things continue on the current track there will be hundreds of claimants needing an attorney for the federal court cases in the next three or four months.

     These are fee-generating cases. Once the ALJ denies the claim, the interim benefits stop. There's also the possibility of fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).

     There are attorneys available to serve as local counsel.

   Social Security is not suggesting that any of these claimants participated in Eric Conn's questionable behavior. They've done nothing wrong. Taking on one of these cases doesn't involve an attorney in a complicated criminal matter.

     There are good arguments that can and should be made on the merits of individual cases but there are extremely strong arguments that can be made in all cases concerning Social Security's methods. Social Security is simply assuming that there is fraud or similar fault in all of these cases. The claimant cannot see the evidence upon which this determination was made. They are not allowed to contest the determination of fraud or similar fault. ALJs hearing these cases are forbidden from considering this issue. The claimants are compelled to prove all over again that they were disabled. Important medical evidence is excluded from consideration and the claimant cannot contest this. The process is completely different than what Social Security has done in the past in cases involving allegations of fraud or similar fault. For that matter, it's completely different than what Social Security is doing right now in other cases. Also, claimants are not allowed to prove that they became disabled at a date later than the prior ALJ decision approving their claim. Most of the claimants caught up in this became sicker as time went on. Even if an ALJ holding a hearing now doesn't think the claimant was disabled at the time he or she went on benefits originally, the ALJ might want to approve the claim as of a later date. I've looked at the statute involved and I can't even figure out what argument that Social Security could make on this issue. It seems clear cut to me that Social Security can't do this.

     If you're interested in getting involved in these fee-generating cases in federal court, contact Mary Going at Appalachian Research and Defense Fund (AppalRed) at mary[@]ardfky.org. Of course, there aren't any brackets in her real e-mail address. I just put them in there so she doesn't get so much spam.

The Social Security Disability Waterfall Chart 2015

Hard Numbers On Hearings And Decisions For Eric Conn's Former Clients

     From WSAZ:

Information released Tuesday reveals a clearer picture on the number of people in Eastern Kentucky and the surrounding area fighting to keep their social security benefits, who are actually winning their cases.

Rep. Hal Rogers released the numbers to our sister-station, WYMT. The data shows about half of the disability recipients who have gone through a hearing to re-determine their eligibility have lost their benefits.

In May 2015, 1,770 people received letters stating their benefits were suspended. 246 of those individuals were able to provide sufficient medical evidence to avoid the hearing process altogether.

The remaining 1,484 people must have a hearing before an administrative law judge.
Hearings have be held for 356 of those people. 173, received a favorable judgment. 107 of those individuals were represented by an attorney during the hearing .

The other half, 183, received an unfavorable judgment. 83 of those people were represented by an attorney.

SSA officials were not able to tell Rogers how many of these people "defaulted" by not responding in any meaningful way or show up to their scheduled hearing.

Government Wants Into Lawsuit Against Conn

     From the Associated Press:

The federal government wants to get involved in a whistleblower lawsuit against Eastern Kentucky disability lawyer Eric C. Conn.

Media outlets report attorneys with the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division filed a motion Tuesday in federal court asking to "partially intervene for a good cause." ...

According to Tuesday's motion, government involvement is warranted in the whistleblower lawsuit because the public needs to be assured a taxpayer-funded program is administered with transparency. ..

Social Security Seeks Ticket To Work Input

     From today's Federal Register:

We are soliciting public input on whether and how we might revise the current Ticket to Work program rules. The Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999 established the Ticket to Work program to allow individuals with disabilities to seek services to obtain and retain employment in order to reduce dependency on cash benefit programs. In creating the program, Congress found that eliminating barriers to work and providing individuals with real choice in obtaining services and technology to find, enter, and maintain employment can greatly improve the short and long-term financial independence and personal well-being of our beneficiaries. We want to explore improving our Ticket to Work program as part of our ongoing effort to help our beneficiaries find and maintain employment that leads to increased independence and enhanced productivity. If we propose specific revisions to our regulations, we will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register.

President's Budget Proposal Released

     President Obama has released his budget proposal for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017, which begins on October 1, 2016. Below are two tables giving Social Security highlights (click on each one to view them full size) but be aware that this is just a proposal. Congress must act upon it and this Congress has exhibited a visceral hostility to the President.

     Note that even with increased funding which is unlikely to come, the agency expects an increase in the average time it takes to get a hearing decision as well as an average speed of answer on telephone calls of greater than ten minutes.

Social Security Agreement With Hungary

     The United States and Hungary have signed a social security agreement. Such agreements help prevent double taxation of wages and help those who move between the two countries.