The Social Security Advisory Board was established in 1994 when Congress passed legislation establishing the Social Security Administration as an independent agency. It is a seven-member bipartisan board which advises the President, the Congress, and the Commissioner of Social Security on matters relating to the DIB and SSI programs. The Advisory Board members are appointed to six year staggered terms and are appointed by both the President and by Congress. The Chairperson of the Board is appointed by the President for a four-year term, coincident with the term of the President or until the designation of a successor.

Mr. Ross, who was introduced at the NADE session by current NADE President Jeff Price, presides as the current Chairperson of the SSA Advisory Board. He has served as partner in a law firm, dealt extensively with public policy issues, and as Commissioner of Social Security. Other members of the current Board include: Martha Keys, David Podoff, Sylvester Schieber, Gerald M Shaw, Mark A Weinberger, and Jo Anne Barnhart, who has just recently been announced as the new Commissioner for Social Security.

...a crisis is looming as long as the fundamental issues remain unaddressed.

The discussion began with announcement that a three-year study has just been completed with the question of how SSA can improve its service to the public and on the changes that need to be made in the agency’s disability programs. He pointed out that far more money is channeled into the Old Age Retirement program yearly but it is a far more stable in its program set-up as compared to the Disability Program. Two-thirds of the SSA operating budget goes to the Disability program. Disability issues are what the general public shows more concern for especially as the “baby boomers” reach the age of greater likelihood of disability.

In fiscal year 2002, the Disability Programs are projected to cost about $96 billion, or five percent of the Federal budget, according to Mr. Ross. Processing disability claims is a massive operation that requires a growing portion of the time and attention of the SSA staff at all levels. For 2002, the SSA field offices will take about 1.5 million Disability Insurance claims and about 1.5 million claims for SSI. State DDS agencies will make decisions on behalf of about two million individuals and about one quarter of these cases will be appealed to an administrative law judge. Based on the appropriation that SSA is currently expected to receive for this fiscal year, about $5.3 billion or more than two-thirds of the agency’s anticipated $7.6 billion administrative budget, will be spent on disability work.

Mr. Ross agrees that this is a huge workload. The Advisory board does not see enough preparation by both Federal and State Social Security staff and by the general public also in preparing for this increase of disability cases. He reports that the problems in the Disability Programs are long-standing and will keep getting bigger as the number of cases grow. Mr. Ross and the Advisory Board feel that a crisis is looming as long as the fundamental issues remain unaddressed. The major problems cover both the general public’s faith in these programs and the government’s ability to administer them. The Board feels that there are two primary areas that require urgent attention.

First, in order to sustain public confidence, the public needs to understand and believe that disability decisions are consistent and fair. The general consensus of opinion is that this in not happening. There are substantial differences in outcomes over time among the State agencies and between other levels of adjudication, especially the ALJs. Reasons for the differences are identified as such contributing factors as economics and demographic differences among regions of the country, the fact that the claimant has no opportunity to meet with the adjudicator until the face-to-face hearing at the ALJ level, and the record remains open throughout the Appeals process.

Most importantly, Mr. Ross points out that SSA has no effective mechanism in place to provide information needed to understand the degree to which the agency’s own policies and procedures - including their uneven implementation - may contribute to inconsistent outcomes.

The second major issue of concern and in need of immediate action, according to the SSA Advisory Board, is that disability policy should be coherent, in accord with the intent of Congress, and one which can be administered by all parts of the adjudication process. He states that Congress has not changed the law for Social Security for 30 years or more but the determination of what constitutes disability has changed in fundamental ways. The disability policy has come to resemble a mosaic of disparate elements pieced together by court decisions and other external pressures rather than the result of a well thought out concept of how the programs should be operating. There is a lack of coherence and clear and consistent guidance of the Social Security programs.

He was met with great audience approval when he said that these problems need to be addressed immediately both by Social Security Administration and the Congress.

His suggestions include:

1. A single presentation of policy for all adjudicators and to make sure that everyone follows the procedure. There should be accountability and unified directions for the various programs.

2. Immediate reform process is necessary. The Commissioner should appoint a Deputy who will answer directly to the Commissioner to oversee this reform program.

3. The development of sound disability policy requires greater medical and vocational expertise than what the Agency currently has. Medical listings should be kept up to date to reflect advances in medical diagnosis and treatment. SSA has no replacement for the Dictionary of Occupational Titles and this leaves a critical policy vacuum since more decisions are being made on the basis of vocational factors.

4. The Agency needs a new Quality Management System.

5. All parts of the disability structure from top to bottom must be strengthened - not one part at the expense of another.

6. The SSA’s field offices need to do a more thorough job of taking claims. This is an area in which the DDS could also assist. This area is of great importance to the initial start of the disability claim process. Not only should SSA have better intake procedures but must explain it more thoroughly to the claimants.

7. The DDSs need to be given resources that match the requirements that place on them and pay and salary needs should be checked out and uniformed. There are huge gaps between policy and Administrative process. Federalizing the DDSs is not the answer and not necessary.

8. In the short term, SSA should issue new Federal regulations that provide clear and strong requirements for the States relating to educational requirements and salaries for staff training, carrying out quality assurance procedures and other areas that affect the quality and timeliness of decisions.

9. SSA should also review carefully the present plan to eliminate the reconsideration step in the appeals process.

10. The record should be closed after a final DDS decision, or in all events, after the ALJ decision is made. The appeal of a case should not be routine, but exceptional, based on the likelihood of real error at the DDS level.

11. ALJs should decide issue of law - not redefine issue of fact. There should be establishment of a Social Security Court.

Mr. Ross entertained questions from the floor. He concluded that everyone, Federal and State, are here because we care about public service. We must keep an objective of improving public service in mind especially in light of the events of September 11 disaster. He states that there are many problems in the current Disability system and it is the job of each of us to try to make it better. In conclusion, he states the Social Security Advisory Board will continue to issue reports stating what they believe needs to be done. They hope that DDS employees and the representation of their professional organization, NADE, will continue to share their views with the Board in the future.

Additional details and information can be obtained from the Social Security Advisory Board’s publications: “Charting the Future of Social Security’s Disability Programs. The Need for Fundamental change” and the document, “Disability Decision Making Data and Materials.”