Legal Aid Society of the D.C. Issues Public Comment on Social Security Administration Notice

WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 -- Nicole Dooley, supervising attorney, and Jennifer Mezey, deputy legal director, at the Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia, have issued a public comment on the Social Security Administration notice entitled "Request for Information: Potential Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income Demonstrations". The comment was written on Nov. 15, 2021, and posted on Nov. 16, 2021:

* * *

The Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia/1 submits the following comments in response to the Social Security Administration's Request for Information, 2021-0025, seeking public input on a wide range of potential services, supports, or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) policy changes. Our comments center on recommendations for increasing the self-sufficiency of individuals receiving SSI and/or SSDI. These comments are based on the experiences of our clients from underserved communities. We are grateful for the opportunity to provide this input.

Reducing barriers to accessing public benefits and services is essential to increasing racial equity. Due to systemic racism and discrimination, people of color make up a disproportionate percentage of those living in poverty./2

As a result, systemic barriers to accessing public benefits pose a particular burden for these communities. Legal Aid clients (most of whom are Black and Brown) frequently encounter structural barriers that prevent them from effectively accessing the critical safety net benefits administered by the Social Security Administration.

These systemic barriers - in areas like education, access to job opportunities, and health care, to name a few - have led to Black recipients in particular being underrepresented in receiving SSDI benefits, which require work history, and overrepresented in SSI benefits, which are for low-income individuals./3

Our suggestions below, if addressed, would increase the self-sufficiency of beneficiaries by increasing their access to the benefits, designed to "assure a minimum level of income" while encouraging beneficiaries to work./4

This increased access would disproportionately assist low-income households of color.

SSA should increase the maximum SSI benefit. The current maximum of $841 per month for 2022/5 is well below the federal poverty level of $1,073 per month for an individual,/6 which is itself less than a third of a living wage for the District of Columbia - $3,524 per month for a single person./7

SSI benefit amounts should be increased significantly to meet SSA's goal of assuring a minimum level of income. As mentioned above, Black recipients are more likely than the overall population to be eligible for SSI, so increasing the maximum benefit could help address racial income disparities.

SSA should increase the asset limits for SSI and adjust the rules around what counts as assets. SSA's current resource limit of $2,000 is too low. Raising this limit, especially in conjunction with raising the maximum SSI benefit, would allow beneficiaries to build an emergency fund and other resources that are essential in providing financial stability and self-sufficiency. Without it, any financial setback could wipe out beneficiaries' meager resources and lead to a struggle for basic necessities.

In addition, SSA should exclude more assets from the resource limit. For example, life insurance policies valued at over $2,000 make someone ineligible for SSI when people use that to provide for family and burial-related assistance.

SSA should improve the administration of SSI and SSDI benefits, including the assessment and collection of overpayments. The process for applying for and receiving SSI and SSDI can be very lengthy, lasting years for many of Legal Aid's clients. Individuals who have been approved for benefits often also experience delays and administrative barriers in receiving those benefits, including back benefits. SSA should include demonstration projects focused on shortening these timelines. This could include improved collection of medical records; hiring more staff to timely process applications and assessments; or investing in additional technology to allow for remote work and hearings. This would especially help improve access for individuals who face technological barriers, either through lack of access to computers or lack of familiarity with technology.

Legal Aid also frequently sees issues with the assessment and collection of overpayments. Many of these are due to SSA's lag in processing the timely reporting of wages. To address this, SSA should build in automatic waiver provisions where overpayments are due to this delayed processing and/or include language in the POMS under the "fault" prong of the waiver analysis that the delay means fault lies with the agency and not the claimant.

SSA should improve language access and general document accessibility. The notices that SSA sends to applicants and beneficiaries are lengthy and hard to understand. Legal Aid is frequently reviewing notices with our clients over the phone because the notices can be incomprehensible to a lay person. This issue is compounded for customers where English is not their first language, as the notices are provided in English. To address this, SSA should take several steps, including the following:

- Incorporate more plain language into all SSA notices/instructions.

- Used numbered lists for instructions and otherwise where appropriate.

- Include cover sheets for all notices in a multitude of languages explaining how to obtain translated documents (e.g. call/go into field office or call 1-800 number)

- Create written SSI/DI applications, and related documents (Disability Reports, etc.) in Spanish and other most common languages.

These improvements would help recipients achieve independence and self-sufficiency by allowing them to access their benefits without repeated need for assistance from SSA staff or advocates.

SSA should eliminate the "marriage" penalty for SSI beneficiaries. When both members of a married couple receive SSI, they are subject to a "marriage" penalty which reduces the total amount of their maximum potential benefit. Where the maximum benefit for a single person in 2022 is $841, so that two recipients living together would receive $1,682, a married couple receives only $1,261 - 25% less. The penalty also applies to the asset limit, which is $3,000 for married couples, compared to $2000 for individuals. This penalty unfairly disadvantages married couples, making it harder for them to achieve self-sufficiency by limiting their ability to afford necessities and build savings. And because SSI is a program for low-income individuals, any penalties disproportionately affect recipients of color.

SSA should revise and update the Dictionary of Occupational Titles, or DOT, to more realistically capture available occupations. The DOT is used by the Social Security Administration in identifying jobs in the national economy that exist in sufficient numbers for applicants for SSI and SSDI to be able to obtain one. The DOT was last updated in 1991, more than thirty years ago./8

It does not accurately reflect the job market and does not "provide information on the mental and cognitive requirements" of the jobs listed therein./9

It therefore is used to determine that applicants can perform work based upon job positions that no longer exist and without accounting for the proliferation of technology and automation over the last 30 years. This likely leads to a number of applicants being denied benefits to which they should be entitled - especially those who are lower income and have not had access to the skill-building and education necessary to work in technological fields. These applicants then have no source of income to use to support themselves and their families.

SSA should recognize non-traditional family units when considering eligibility for survivor's benefits. When an SSDI recipient dies, survivor's benefits may be paid to widows and widowers, unmarried children under 18, children of any age with a disability that started before they turned 22, and parents who depended on the recipient for support. These limitations do not recognize several common non-traditional family units, including unmarried long-term couples; and children being cared for by other family members, like grandparents or aunts and uncles. Expanding the categories eligible for survivor's benefits to acknowledge these nontraditional family structures will help provide income, and therefore self-sufficiency, for survivors who will otherwise be left without the financial support that had been provided by their loved one.

Conclusion

Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Please contact us at [email protected] if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

The Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia

Nicole Dooley, Supervising Attorney

Jennifer Mezey, Deputy Legal Director

* * *

Footnotes:

1/ The Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia was formed in 1932 to "provide legal aid and counsel to indigent persons in civil law matters and to encourage measures by which the law may better protect and serve their needs." Legal Aid is the oldest and largest general civil legal services program in the District of Columbia. Over the last 90 years, Legal Aid staff and volunteers have been making justice real - in individual and systemic ways - for tens of thousands of persons living in poverty in the District. The largest part of our work is comprised of individual representation in housing, domestic violence/family, public benefits, and consumer law. We also work on immigration law matters and help individuals with the collateral consequences of their involvement with the criminal justice system. From the experiences of our clients, we identify opportunities for court and law reform, public policy advocacy, and systemic litigation. More information about Legal Aid can be obtained from our website, www.LegalAidDC.org, and our blog, www.MakingJusticeReal.org.

2/ In D.C., for example, Black households make up 75% of those earning less than $10,000 per year, but only 12% of households with an income greater than $200,000 per year. D.C. Policy Center for the Council Office of Racial Equity, D.C. Racial Equity Profile for Economic Outcomes 9 (Jan. 2021), https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ffa2eb4a24aef1e5b91c0d6/t/607df46d185dd55abe40f644/ 1618867332939/DC+Racial+Equity+Profile+for+Economic+Outcomes.pdf.

3/ https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/rsnotes/rsn2014-01.html

4/ Social Security Handbook, available at https://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/handbook/handbook.21/handbook-2102.html.

5/ The current maximums are listed at https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/SSI.html#:~:text=SSI%20amounts%20for%202022,%24421%20f or%20an%20essential%20person.

6/ https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/federal-poverty-level-fpl/.

7/ See https://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/11001 (assuming the individual works 40 hours per week, 4.3 weeks per month).

8/ https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oalj/topics/libraries/LIBDOT

9/ https://www.ssa.gov/disabilityresearch/occupational_info_systems.html

* * *

The notice can be viewed at https://www.regulations.gov/document/SSA-2021-0025-0001

TARGETED NEWS SERVICE (founded 2004) features non-partisan 'edited journalism' news briefs and information for news organizations, public policy groups and individuals; as well as 'gathered' public policy information, including news releases, reports, speeches. For more information contact MYRON STRUCK, editor, [email protected], Springfield, Virginia; 703/304-1897; https://targetednews.com