At the end of 2011, 85 percent of SSI recipients were receiving benefits based on disability or blindness. Individuals file claims at a local Social Security office, and we send claims requiring an evaluation of disability to the State DDS for a disability determination. Applicants may appeal unfavorable
initial DDS decisions. Historically, the State DDS conducted the first level of appeal — the reconsideration appeal step. Persons denied at the reconsideration level could then request a hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ) and, if dissatisfied with the hearing decision, could request a review by the Appeals Council. Those dissatisfied with the Appeals Council’s action could seek further relief through the Federal court system. This appeals process is still in effect for the majority of new applicants.
1 However, since the mid-1990s SSA has conducted small pilots testing revisions to this process and introduced a modification of this process that 10 States utilize for applications filed on or after October 1, 1999. The revised process eliminates the reconsideration step, so the first level of appeal of an initial determination is a request for hearing before an ALJ.
This process of application and appeal can span several years. However, before 1993 the only data available on the disability determination process resided in files compiled at each separate stage of the process and only captured various point-in-time snapshots. Only a longitudinal database of administrative records at all stages of appeal can provide a complete picture of the disability determination process. Beginning in 1993, SSA’s Office of Disability Programs constructed such a longitudinal database (the “Disability Research File”) to assist the agency in understanding and managing this process. However, we did encounter some problems in the construction of this database due to inconsistencies in the data collected from all the respective levels of appeal. The following sections present some additional details and qualifications essential to a complete understanding of the resulting data. Following these technical notes, tables V.C1 and V.C2 present the latest available summary of results on disability determinations under
Title XVI.
Methods used to build the Title XVI Disability Research File — The “base” file for the Title XVI research file is the Supplemental Security Record (SSR). We match the “base” file against records from various other administrative sources, including transactions from the disability determination (SSA-831) files, Social Security number identification records and earnings data, and Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR) appeals data.
Creating the Disability Research file is a cumbersome process; it involves about 200 steps and generally requires 2 to 4 months to complete. The process is complex because we assemble the file based on filing date cohorts, and many of the source files do not contain a filing date. The basic data sources provide information for the three most recent calendar year cohorts. Older calendar year cohorts reflect updated activity since the last time we built the file. Since the process is so time-consuming, we update the research file only annually (usually beginning in July); research file data are not yet available for claims filed in 2011.
Methods used for estimating results (through January 2012) for claims filed in 2011 — Although decision counts are available for 2011 filers (from many of the “source” files), those counts do not translate directly into the claims/appeals counts in the following tables, since we consolidate multiple transactions and apply claims-based tolerance rules when we build the research file.
To prepare preliminary estimates of results (through January 2012) for 2011 filers, we started from the latest available transaction data, such as the SSA-831 data, and took into account recent years’ experience of the relationship between corresponding earlier transaction data and the resulting claims/appeals data in completed research files. We estimate ODAR appeals activity from a file that tracks individual claimants, rather than individual claims, which has resulted in a slight undercount of ODAR activity. Recent revocation of the agency’s “subsequent application” policy should largely eliminate the disparity between claims and claimants.
While we believe that these methods are reasonable, we emphasize that the resulting estimates may not be completely reliable, especially because the estimates give results only through
January 2012, whereas the final research files will reflect information through June 2012. Actual data for 2011 will replace these estimates in the 2013 Annual Report.
