I had a video hearing Monday morning, 4 days ago. I felt good about the hearing and the claim overall. Now, Friday morning before 8:00 AM, a Fully Favorable decision has already been issued.
Waiting for a decision is hard for clients, particularly clients with some level of anxiety. To get a decision so quickly is an act of kindness, an act of grace. The client is grateful. I am grateful. It is worth sharing good news these days, when things proceed so expeditiously.
The addition of initial and Reconsideration status reports to Social Security’s Electronic Records Express (ERE) platform has been a real benefit for my practice. I have a number of claims at the initial and reconsideration levels, and it is much easier to track their progress now that they are all listed on ERE.
The next step in this evolution for my practice has been a small specialized software company called Chronicle Legal. I have been using Chronicle for about a year now, and it has been transformative for my practice. Chronicle’s software accesses your ERE files every 2 hours, and sends you an immediate email if the status of any cases changes, or if any documents are added to the electronic file. You know immediately when a case is closed. You know immediately if a disability adjudicator has sent a letter or a form to your client. This puts you way ahead of the curve, and you can be proactive when correspondence is coming your way.
Chronicle tracks all your ERE cases, whether they are at initial reconsideration, the hearing level, or the Appeals Council. It is a terrific service, and a tremendous time-saver for me. It allows me to handle more claims more efficiently.
If you are a disability lawyer not using this service, you should check it out, and request a demo. Tell them I sent you! To be clear, I am not being compensated in any way for this recommendation.
I have had several claims this year granted on the record. An “on the record” (OTR) request asks Social Security to grant your case on the record without a hearing. This request is for claims pending at the hearing level at the Office of Hearings Operations.
OTRs are favored by Social Security, because they save valuable resources. Why go though the hearing process if the claim is definitely going to be granted? Cases granted on the record free up scarce resources for more complicated claims.
On the record decisions can only be fully favorable. You cannot lose your case on the record. Rather, if the OTR request is not granted, your claim simply keeps its place in line for an eventual hearing.
Although there is nothing to lose by filing an OTR request, they should only be filed in a minority of cases, where a favorable result is mandated by the evidence and by Social Security’s rules and regulations. Also, the medical evidence in the record should be up to date before an on the record request is filed.
Two areas where an OTR is appropriate are 1) if the claimant meets a listed impairment, or 2) if the claim would be decided favorably at step 5 by the Medical-Vocational Guidelines. Such claims should be clear-cut winners. Claims that require a decision based on subjective evidence (such as the level of the claimant’s pain), or claims that would require vocational evidence, are not strong candidates for an on the record decision.
The other advantage of an OTR request for the practitioner is that your hearing brief is essentially done in advance. If the OTR request is not granted, your hearing brief is already written, and may just need a minor update before filing.
The latest waterfall chart has been released. I love this chart, and have been posting annually on this blog for years.
This Appeals Council Order came across my desk today. The AC remanded the claim for lack of compliance with Ruling 24-3p, using this language:
The vocational expert did not comply with the requirements of Social Security Ruling 24- 3p, and the Administrative Law Judge did not otherwise obtain the needed information (see also HALLEX HA 01260.074). As explained in Social Security Ruling 24-3p, our adjudicators are responsible for evaluating vocational expert evidence within the context of the overall evidence in a claim. If the vocational expert does not provide the expected information and explanation as outlined in Social Security Ruling 24-3p, the Administrative Law Judge will usually need to develop the record with sufficient evidence to make a supported finding at steps four and five. In the present case, the vocational expert did not identify the data sources relied on in providing evidence, he did not explain his general approach to estimating job numbers, and there is no evidence that the record was developed with the needed information as required in Social Security Ruling 24-3p. Accordingly, because the vocational expert testimony is not compliant with the requirements in Social Security Ruling 24-3p, additional vocational testimony consistent with the requirements of Social Security Ruling 24-3p is required (see also HALLEX HA 01260.074).
Now, this will be easy for the ALJ to fix upon remand. But it is interesting that the Appeals Council is enforcing these requirements. Ruling 24-3p, in my view, is just a bandage over the scab of outdated vocational evidence used routinely by vocational witnesses and accepted by Social Security at disability hearings. The randomness of this evidence is a significant procedural due process problem for the SSA. I haven’t had a chance to litigate this issue yet in federal court, but that day will come.
This AC remand was from December 2025. The ALJs will get the memo soon enough, and make the required inquiries at every hearing. But in the meantime, the lack of inquiry at hearing about data sources is a basis for a remand.
Disability Determination Services (DDS) are the state agencies that make initial and reconsideration determinations for Social Security disability and SSI claims. That is where the medical records are ordered, and the claim is evaluated by a disability adjudicator.
We are now seeing growing delays in Staging, which occurs after an initial claim claim or Reconsideration request has been processed by the local office and sent to DDS. Staging is the period of time that the claim is pending at DDS awaiting the assignment of a disability adjudicator. Currently in Maine, I have an initial claim that has been in Staging for 7 months. The client filed an application last summer, and it was sent to DDS on August 5, 2025. Here we are more 7 months later, and no adjudicator has been assigned. The Maine DDS is operating at about half staff. They do not appear to be hiring new disability adjudicators, and it takes months to train a new person at that job.
Reconsideration cases are being sent out-of-state, most recently to Rhode Island and Pennsylvania, where there is available capacity. So Reconsideration claims are mostly moving forward, with a few exceptions. I have 3 Reconsideration claims that have not been assigned after over 5 months.
This is not the fault of the individual disability adjudicators, who continue to do yeoman’s work. It is due to a critical scarcity of resources at DDS, and also due to Social Security’s emphasis on CDRs (Continuing Disability Reviews) rather than processing new claims.
Substantial Gainful Activity (SGA) is the amount of money that one can earn monthly and still qualify for Social Security disability benefits. The amount is adjusted each year for cost of living, as shown by this table. In 2025, the amount was $1,620 per month. This year, it rises to $1,690. SGA is based on gross pay, before payroll taxes are withheld.
The SGA amount is important for two groups of people:
For those receiving Title II disability benefits and working part-time, it is your responsibility to keep track of your monthly earnings and make sure they remain below the level of SGA.
Social Security field offices, hearing offices, and the Appeals Council are all operating during the shutdown. Those staffing Social Security offices are not receiving their paychecks during the shutdown. However, they continue to stoically go about their duties.
DDS offices are operating as well. However, DDS does not have funding for consultative exams during the shutdown, so those exams are not being scheduled. This may hold up some claims.
As always, if you can conduct your business online, do so.
I deal with the folks at Social Security field offices all the time. They are understaffed and under stress.
The New York Times reports on this today (gift article):
A Diminished Social Security Work Force, and Its Customers, Feel the Strain
Social Security uses an electronic claim file for its disability claims. Representatives can upload records, forms, and correspondence directly into the file. It is a terrific system, and is appreciated particularly by those of us who have been doing this long enough to know what it was like using the old paper claim files, circa 2006 and before.
Typically, when a document is uploaded, it shows up in the Case Documents section of the electronic file within hours, and certainly the following day. In the past few days, documents are not getting into the file overnight or even the next day, even though properly uploaded, with a receipt for the document.
Anyone else experiencing this?