A Mobile Accessible Platform To Handle All Of Social Security's Transactions?

      From Federal News Network:

The Biden administration is working on an executive order focused on improving customer experience within government and building on its ongoing work to improve the equity of public-facing services. ...

The draft executive order directs agencies to link customer experience metrics to their strategic plans and priority goals. It also ties that progress into performance review requirements for members of the Senior Executive Service and senior management. ...

Individual agency actions under consideration include the State Department providing a new online passport renewal experience, the Social Security Administration creating a mobile-accessible online platform that can handle all transactions and the Transportation Security Administration implementing new tools at airport security checkpoints to reduce passenger wait times. ...

    People who think that a single mobile accessible platform will handle all of Social Security's transactions with the public greatly underestimate the complexity of the work that the Social Security Administration does. That's one of Social Security's biggest problems -- the public perception that what the agency does is simple -- just processing people onto retirement benefits. Most of what the agency does is far more complicated than that. Many of the agency's forms should be simplified but they would still be far too long to be completed on a cell phone.

Field Office Closures Have Had A Devastating Effect

     From Jonathan Stein and David Weaver writing in The Hill:

The Social Security Administration's (SSA’s) 1,200 field offices have been closed for the last 20 months, with devastating effects for disabled Americans. Pre-pandemic, more than 43 million Americans were served at SSA field offices; the people most in need of walk-in, on-demand services included people with low- or zero-incomes, housing instability, limited English proficiency, or significant physical or mental disabilities that were themselves barriers to access. With office closures, their inability to file applications and appeals and to correct bureaucratic errors has led to historically unprecedented declines in people receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) disability benefits.

In fiscal year (FY) 2021, SSA's awards of SSDI benefits to disabled persons and their family members were down 25 percent relative to FY 2019. SSI disability awards, granted to people without much work history, were down even more, with a 30 percent decline.

Had SSI awards continued at the pre-pandemic level, there would have been 280,000 more SSI awards over the last two fiscal years. In the pre-pandemic years of FY 2017-2019, SSDI awards were declining only modestly; had that trend continued, there would have been 270,000 more SSDI awards in the last two fiscal years. ...

The decline in awards has continued to the present period. SSDI and SSI awards for September 2021 were down 34 and 42 percent, respectively, from the figures for September 2019. ...

It is crucial that office reopening allow for walk-in service. Many current or potential SSI beneficiaries lack reliable access to internet or have limited minutes available for their phones. ...

Last, but certainly not least: It is 11 months into the current administration, and there has yet to be a nomination of a Social Security Commissioner. Many of the needed changes in policy and personnel at SSA can only be made by a Senate-confirmed commissioner, and time is running out to act before the next election. ...

OHO Stats

     The report shown below was obtained from Social Security by the National Organization of Social Security Claimants Representatives (NOSSCR) and published in its newsletter, which is not available online to non-members. It contains basic operating statistics for Social Security's Office of Hearings Operations (OHO). 

Click on image to view full size

The Rich Get Richer

      From the Michigan Retirement and Disability Research Center:

Disparities in Social Security claim ages have risen since the early 1990s. With high earners increasingly likely to delay claiming, and also living longer on average than lower earners, late claimants may differ in critical ways from early claimants. Using Social Security Administration data and focusing on men, we find that late claimants have lower mortality than those who claim at age 62, so late claimants are adversely selected. As a result of selective claiming combined with improvements in actuarial adjustments, the return to delaying claiming has become systematically positive for those who actually delay, but not for those who claim early. We further find that selective claiming increases benefits by more for those with higher lifetime earnings because their return to delay exceeds actuarially fair amounts by larger margins. Lastly, we find that selective claiming has a modest effect on total payouts, but a more consequential effect on inequality in lifetime benefit payouts. In the aggregate, the increase in Trust Fund payouts as a result of adverse selection in claiming was 0.5% for the most recent retiring cohorts. Yet, lifetime benefit payouts are 1.9% higher for those in the highest quartile of lifetime earnings as a result of claim-age differences, compared to what payouts would be if they had the same claim ages as those in the lowest quartile, and this contributes 2.8% to the difference in expected lifetime benefits between the highest and lowest quartiles.

The Public Wonders Why The Field Offices Are Still Closed

      Clevelanders question why Social Security field office is still closed.

Little Screening For Medical Consultants

      From Actions Needed by SSA to Ensure Disability Medical Consultants Are Properly Screened and Trained, a report by the Government Accountability Office:

SSA cannot be sure that the state agencies’ consultants are qualified and trained to appropriately inform decisions on disability claims. SSA policy requires state agencies to screen their consultants by checking them against a database of individuals barred from participating in federal programs. Also, SSA policy sets requirements for state agencies to provide initial and follow-up training. However, state agencies told us they do not always do so.  

Of the 52 agencies:
• 14 said they did not consistently perform required checks on consultants either when hiring or annually, and

• Nine said they did not give consultants some element of required initial or refresher training.

     The only requirement is that they not have a history of involvement in defrauding the federal government and they don't always enforce even that minimal standard? Is that how you run a quality program? Are opinions from such consultants entitled to deference?

Veterans Day 2021

 

Yesterday's Supreme Court Argument

     After yesterday's oral argument before the Supreme Court I had expressed optimism that the Court would find it unconstitutional to deny SSI benefits to U.S. citizens who live in Puerto Rico. Others, including a writer for the highly-regarded SCOTUSblog, felt otherwise.

     Let me explain. There were a number of questions asked by the justices about whether finding this exclusion unconstitutional would trigger litigation claiming denial of equal protection because certain laws favor one state or one region over another. Although the attorney representing Mr. Vaello-Madero could have done a better job of expressing it, the answer seemed simple to me. This sort of lawsuit can already be brought but seldom is because all that is required to withstand an equal protection challenge is a "rational basis" for a law. That's a minimal requirement that would normally be met. It's just that in this case, the exclusion of SSI is so obnoxious that it cannot even meet a minimal requirement.  If a statute is found that is as obnoxious as this one, then by all means the Court should find it unconstitutional but such a statute should be almost nonexistent. The states have representation in Congress. Puerto Rico doesn't. My interpretation of the questioning was that the Justices want to make sure they write a narrow decision finding it unconstitutional to deny SSI in Puerto Rico and were inquiring about how they should do it. Another interpretation would be that the justices were expressing reasons why it would be too dangerous to give relief to Mr. Vaello-Madero.

     Anyway, listen to the oral argument yourself and tell us what you think.