A Little Update On A DOT Replacement -- Don't Expect It Soon

     The National Association of Disability Examiners (NADE), an organization of the personnel who are involved in making initial and reconsideration determinations on Social Security disability claims, has issued its Spring 2016 newsletter.
     The newsletter includes a summary of a meeting that NADE officials had with Gina Clemons, Social Security's Associate Commissioner for the Office of Disability Policy. Here's an excerpt from NADE's writeup of the meeting:

The new OIS [Occupational Information System] will include many occupational descriptors similar to those adjudicators currently use in the DOT [Dictionary of Occupational Titles]. The DOT contains discrete and well-established descriptions of the physical demands of occupations, but it does not provide information on the mental and cognitive requirements of occupations. The agency hopes to include mental and cognitive data elements in the OIS. However, this would be part of a separate BLS 9Bureau of Labor Statistics] collection, so they are working hard to determine the most useful mental and cognitive elements before BLS performs further testing in this area. The agency’s goal is to have this new tool (without the mental and cognitive data elements) ready for use by 2019.

Appeals Council Seldom Grants An Exception

     The most recent issue of the newsletter of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR), which is not available online, has an article prepared by Social Security's Office of Appellate Operations Staff on the exception process at the Appeals Council. Generally, a claimant may not file a new claim for disability benefits while an old claim is pending at the Appeals Council. However, there is an exception process where there is evidence of a new critical or disabling condition. Here's a table from the article showing just how infrequently the agency finds grounds for an exception:

     Does it seem outrageous to you that any claimant could file a new claim while an old one is pending at the Appeals Council? What do you think about the fact that the Appeals Council sits on most cases for well over a year and often over a year and a half yet denies review something like 80% of the time? It almost seems like the delay is intentional, just to make taking a case to the United States District Court less appealing. Whether it's intentional or not, that's the effect. I don't think that's appropriate.

And Yet We Have A Five Month Waiting Period For Social Security Disability Benefits And A 29 Month Waiting Period For Medicare For The Disabled

     From the Associated Press:

Two-thirds of Americans would have difficulty coming up with the money to cover a $1,000 emergency, according to an exclusive poll released Thursday ... 

Seventy-five percent of people in households making less than $50,000 a year would have difficulty coming up with $1,000 to cover an unexpected bill. But when income rose to between $50,000 and $100,000, the difficulty decreased only modestly to 67 percent.

Even for the country's wealthiest 20 percent — households making more than $100,000 a year — 38 percent say they would have at least some difficulty coming up with $1,000.

Social Security To Track Disability Claims Related To Flint Water Contamination

     The Social Security Administration has decided to start tracking disability claims related to the lead contamination in the Flint, MI water supply. They're not going to treat the claims differently; just track them.

About That Priority Processing At The Appeals Council -- No One At The Appeals Council Seems To Know Anything About It

     I posted some information that Social Security had given to the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) about a plan for the Appeals Council to give priority in the processing of the cases of certain claimants. The most important category in the plan is claimants 55 and older.

     I've noticed and others in my firm have noticed that despite this plan claimants 55 and older don't seem to be getting any special treatment at the Appeals Council. We're starting to ask questions. Here's a note that one legal assistant at my firm put in our database concerning her inquiry about one client:

05/19/16: TC [Telephone Call] to the AC [Appeals Council] and spoke to ____ who told me the case is pending in branch ____. I told her about the new list that NOSSCR has put out this month for expediting AC cases and this case meets that list since the clt is over 55yo. She didn't know anything about it and transferred me to the supervisor, ______. Spoke to her at length and she pulled it up on the blog [this blog] and said they haven't been told anything about it and she doesn't even know how to flag a case for these reasons.

She's going to speak to the Council Ombudsman, Terry Jensen about this and call me back

Stealing From The Disabled

     From the Tampa Bay Times:

The former chief financial officer of a program for disabled people admits in a court paper that he and others diverted $617,435 in Social Security payments, raiding client personal accounts for a decade to cover operating expenses.

Frank Pannullo, 69, is the third employee of the now-defunct Hillsborough Association for Retarded Citizens to enter into a federal plea agreement. ...

HARC, which had been renamed the Hillsborough Achievement and Resource Centers before it closed in 2013, ran group homes and community programs, caring for people with disabilities such as Down syndrome or Alzheimer's disease. ...

Residents had individual bank accounts. Each month, HARC deducted $637 for expenses, leaving the rest behind.

But if accumulated savings topped $2,000, clients were at risk of losing need-based Supplemental Security Income.

So HARC put away the excess in a separate, pooled account that collected about $617,435 over the course of 10 years. ...

Not long after the account's 2001 creation, Pannullo and the CEO began taking money out of it to feed HARC's operating fund, according to the plea agreement. ...

Hearing On Social Security Information Systems

     The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will hold a hearing at 9:00 on May 26 on Social Security's information systems. No further details are available at this point other than that this is a hearing before the whole committee.

Cut Government Until It Bleeds And Then Complain About The Bloodstains

     The Social Security Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee held a hearing yesterday on Protecting Social Security From Waste, Fraud and Abuse. The only witness was Patrick O'Carroll, who will soon be leaving his position as Inspector General at Social Security. I don't see anything particularly new in his prepared remarks.

     The ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, Xavier Becerra, entered an interesting statement in the record. Here is an excerpt:

Congress’ current trend of prioritizing program integrity activities at the expense of service to applicants, beneficiaries, and taxpayers is unsustainable.
Social Security’s budget should not be treated as a zero-sum game. We should not be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

In my six years as Ranking Member of this Subcommittee, not once have we held a hearing on SSA’s operating budget.

There is no question that funding for program integrity is absolutely integral to ensuring that Americans receive benefits in the right amount, and that only those who are eligible receive payments.

But it is equally important to ensure that: SSA has the tools and resources needed to provide quick and timely service to the millions of Americans receiving Social Security, and to the millions more who will – in the coming years – be applying and qualifying for the benefits they and their families have earned.

     Below are some charts from the statement illustrating the problems at Social Security.

 

     By the way, Becerra's name gets mentioned from time to time as a potential Vice-Presidential candidate.