Articles from prior issues of The Advocate

September/October, 1999

nade

Jeffrey H. Price
Post Office Box 243
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Ph. (919) 779-0777
or 1-800-443-9359
E-mail Jprice0602@aol.com

August 5, 1999

Mr. Kenneth D. Nibali,
Associate Commissioner
Social Security Administration
560 Altmeyer Building
6401 Security Boulevard
Baltimore, Maryland 21235

Dear Mr. Nibali:

The October 1, 1999 date for the launch of the prototype of the new disability claims process is rapidly approaching and there still seem to be as many questions as there are answers about this new process. New questions continue to arise and some old questions continue to linger, unanswered. NADE shares the commitment of support for the new process that has been expressed by top officials at SSA. We share their opinion that the best potential for ultimate success of the this new process depends, in large part, on SSA resolving the issues and concerns that arise from the people who will be directly participating in the prototype. A new question has arisen that expresses great concern. We would appreciate a quick response from SSA to resolve the concerns of these employees. The question is:

Can disability examiners who are performing the duties of the Single Decision Maker be held personally liable, and personally sued, for any erroneous decisions?

This question came from one of the ten prototype states but expresses a concern that is shared by many DDS employees. Since the Single Decision Maker is not codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, there has developed a perception that an examiner who is performing in this role does not have the protection offered by law. Therefore, many have come to believe that the Single Decision Maker can be held personally liable, and personally sued, for decisions they make for which the claimant may not agree. Some have questioned as to whether the regulations that permit SSA to test the prototype will exempt DDS employees from such increased personal liability. The members of NADE would appreciate a response from SSA addressing this issue as quickly as possible.

NADE has also previously inquired about the status of RFC assessments prepared by Single Decision Makers and the role these assessments will have in the subsequent appeals process. To date, we have not received an official response from SSA. We would appreciate it very much if SSA could provide a quick response to this question:

Does SSA have any plans, either immediate or long term, to establish some method by which Administrative Law Judges, who review disability claims on appeal from the DDSs, must acknowledge and describe the weight given to RFC assessments prepared by Single Decision Makers in the same manner that they must currently acknowledge and describe the weight given to RFC assessments prepared by DDS Medical Consultants?

It is clear to the members of NADE that the concept of the Single Decision Maker affords a disability examiner with more authority and increased responsibility. The members of NADE believe that SDM is one of the most critical pieces of the new disability claims process. We strongly believe that the RFC assessments prepared by SDMs must be considered by Administrative Law Judges in order to give credibility to this concept. The members of NADE would also appreciate a response to this question as soon as possible.

Finally, NADE would like to remind SSA that many DDSs are currently working hard to upgrade their staff positions to offer increased pay in order to attract and retain qualified and experienced personnel. We believe the pay issue is an especially important matter since “inadequate pay” continues to be one of the main reasons cited by departing DDS staff. As the amount of work and the complexity of the work performed by DDS staff personnel continues to multiply, the DDSs are finding it increasingly more difficult to attract qualified new employees, and to retain the experienced employees they currently have. NADE has brought the issue of DDS staff turnover to SSA’s attention in previous communications and we also discussed it in our meeting with Commissioner Apfel. I am sure that you are aware of the alarming statistic that indicates that nearly one-half of the disability examiners in the nation have less than two years of adjudicative experience. NADE strongly believes that it is vitally important that SSA increase its involvement in efforts by the DDSs to secure higher pay for their staff personnel. If good people are needed to do a good job, then they should be rewarded with good pay! NADE is very appreciative of the commitment of support that has been offered by SSA. Likewise, we hope that SSA is appreciative of the commitment of support from the thousands of DDS employees who bear the expectation of making the vision of this new disability- claims process a reality. We urge SSA to utilize every means at its disposal to support the DDS efforts to obtain increased pay for their personnel. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey H. Price President

cc: Mr. John R. Dyer, Principle Deputy Commissioner

National Association of Disability Examiners