Articles from prior issues of The Advocate

January/February 2000

November 15,1999
The Honorable Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner
Social Security Administration
500 E Street S W, Suite 850
Washington DC 20254

Dear Commissioner Apfel: Enclosed is a copy of NADE's statement for the record of the October 21, 1999 hearing on the Social Security Administration's management of its disability caseload. While we would have preferred to present oral testimony, circumstances were such that for this hearing we felt that preparing a statement for the record would allow us to better represent the views of our diverse membership by allowing time to obtain member input, It also allows us to address issues raised in other testimonies.

Although a cursory review might indicate that the Disability Case Manager (DCM) process would provide the "world class service" which disability applicants deserve, we do mot believe that this is a viable alternative to either the current process, or to the new process being prototyped. Because of the constantly increasing complexity of both the disability examiner and the claims representative positions, NADE has always viewed the DCM initiative as a flawed concept. However, we agreed d to support a limited pilot. This pilot has, to date, been tested under extremely favorable conditions, processing carefully selected caseloads. Although several of our members are involved in the pilot and have generally found it to be a rewarding experience it must be recognized that DCMs are not dealing with the same processing pressures which examiners and claims representatives not involved in the pilot face; nor are the DCMs handling the same type or complexity of claims. In addition, the discrepancy in pay between the state DCMs and the federal DCMs seriously jeopardizes the federal-state relationship.

The DCM pilot was initially scheduled to run for three years. We recognize that SSA's commitment to AFGE effectively eliminates the possibility that the pilot will be discontinued before then. Therefore, as state DCMs drop out of the pilot there is pressure to replace them. The DDSs, however, are increasingly reluctant to invest scarce resources in what remains a flawed process. No new DCMs - federal or state - should be added to the pilot. Any information gained from this pilot will already be skewed by the difference in caseload size and processing time pressure on the adjudicator and the types of cases processed. Adding new DCMs in the middle of the pilot will only further skew the data and limit the usefulness of the information obtained.

NADE recognizes the importance of the Social Security and Supplemental Security Income disability programs on the lives of disabled individuals and their families. We are concerned about the hardships to Title II beneficiaries and their families caused by the five month waiting period. (Enclosed is a copy of the Executive Summary of our Position Paper on the elimination of the five month period.)

As always, we appreciate the opportunity for open dialogue and look forward to future opportunities as members of the Social Security team.

Sincerely,

Terri Spurgeon, President 15692 Blackwater Road Zachary LA 70791 225-925-3529

Copies of this letter were also sent to: John R. Dyer (Principal Deputy Commissioner), Kenneth D. Nibali (Associate Commissioner); Judy Chesser (Deputy Commissioner for Legislation); Kim Hildred (Staff Director, Subcommittee on Social Security); Ron Haskins (Staff Director, Subcommittee on Human Resources, Committee on Ways and Means); Sandra Casper Wise (Minority Staff Counsel, Subcommittee on Social Security, Committee on Way and Means); Christopher King (Legislative Director for Congressman Jim McCrery); and Stanford G. Ross (Chairman, Social Security Advisory Board).