FedRo position

[saltchunk]

There has been a bit of griping by disability attorneys over on the "Connect" board at www.traverlaw.com with regard to the FedRo position.  I'd like to hear the inside scoop from FedRo attorneys.  What is the job like?  Is there good job satisfaction?  How does it compare to the senior attorney position?  Is there great pressure to be highly productive?  Is there pressure to deny cases?

A private disability attorney on the Connect board seems to suggest that submitting evidence to the FedRo only to have it denied, will make it harder for the ALJ to pay, becausethe judge will have to deal with the FedRo opinion.  Of course, we all know how simple it is for us to dismiss the DDS opinions, so I don't see why we won't be able to dismiss FedRo opinions just as easily.

Any thoughts of the FedRo program and how it is going?

[jrh83]

The early news on the FedRO starts with the lack of news.  They were hired and trained last fall and have been working since about October.  I have yet to see any statistics showing how many decsions the RO's have issued.  Given that the program was touted as the "linchpin" of the New Approach, I'd have expected trumpets and parades if the news was good.  Total silence. . . hmmmmm, could it mean the news is not so good?

I'd expect to be hearing that a fair number of cases were making it to local ODAR offices by now, but early polling indicate that sightings have been very, very rare.

Reports from the RO's include complaints that their supervisors are second-guessing the decisions and interfering with development requests.  Management allegedly implemented a policy that DO determinations (regarding whether post-AOD work is SGA) must be considered correct.  An RO has complained that a supervisor precluded the issuance of a favorable decision relying on a CE opinion, directing the RO to give greater weight to a state agency source.

[jrh83]

Rumor has it that upper management is "disappointed" with the early results from the FedRO program.  While I have been unable to access any official statistics, it appears that the cases that have emerged from the FedRO to local ODAR hearing offices can by counted in dozens rather than hundreds.  This is with close to 60 line FedRO's (about 30 hired in August and another 30 in October 2006).

If each FedRO disposed of just 6 cases per month and paid one third of them, close to 500 cases would have made it to the hearing offices in January and February.  It the actual figures even approach half that number, I will be quite surprised.

I'm not at all surprised at these figures.  After all close to 40 of the current FedRO's had no SSA experience.  Furthermore, the regulations indicate they are being asked to perform considerably more work per case than the old Adjudication Officers were required.  They have fewer support staff per FedRO than there were support staff per AO.  I'm afraid that just like in the AO program, the FedRO projections had no relation to reality.  The FedRO program will miss those goals miserably, no matter how hard or efficiently the FedRO's work.

[DRS-81]

 This is the NTEU message on the subject of the RO.  The union thinks it is probably on the way out. 

                                                      March 19, 2007
Folks:
The Importance of Addressing the Backlog

Members of the Subcommittee on Social Security of the House Committee on Ways and Means have made in clear that addressing the backlog at ODAR hearing offices should be of the highest priority. This is a significant change, and one that bodes well for us. SSA is under considerable pressure to deal with the backlog, and there is little doubt that Commissioner Astrue understands the situation and is committed to effectively dealing with it. However, it is equally clear that presently hearing offices cannot effectively deal with the backlog. Congressman Michael R. McNulty, Chairman of the Social Security Subcommittee, and Congressman Sam Johnson, the ranking member of that Subcommittee, sent a letter dated March 15, 2007 to Congressmen John Spratt and Paul Ryan, the Chairman and ranking member, respectively, of the House Committee on the Budget seeking to significantly increase the appropriations to SSA. Prominently cited in that letter was the size and impact of the Hearings level backlog.
Commissioner Astrue: We have a solution to the backlog crisis that could be implemented immediately; that is cost effective; and that has a history of success – an enhanced version the original Senior Attorney Program. We can provide the Agency with an additional 100,000 legally defensible decisions a year without adversely impacting ALJ productivity or the payment rate.

DSI

Commissioner Astrue has stated that he will review DSI in detail prior to deciding which DSI programs will be retained, which will be terminated, and which will be altered. Currently, there are a number of rumors floating around that indicate that the FedRO program will be terminated. While we emphasize that we have no definitive “inside knowledge” regarding the veracity of these rumors, we believe that they may well be true. The implementation of the FedRO program has been a disappointment to many, including NTEU Chapter 224, and it may well be following the path of the Disability Redesign and HPI. In any event DSI was never intended to offer immediate relief to the Hearings level backlog.

As you will recall, we have been a supporter of the FedRO concept - as it was originally formulated in 2003. We have vigorously cautioned against significant changes from the original concept of an independent decision maker located in the field. We have been very disappointed that our warnings were ignored. Simply stated, the FedRO program that was implemented is not the FedRO program we supported. We believe that the FedRO program as presently constituted is seriously flawed, and consequently, we are not surprised by its relative lack of success despite the talent and dedication of the current FedROs. The bureaucratic reengineering of the FedRO concept may simply have been too much to overcome.

As the FedRO program rolled out, it became clear that the original concept, an independent decision maker empowered to review appeals of state agency determinations and render legally defensible decisions, had not been realized, and that the FedRO had been turned into a “federal reconsideration”. Bureaucratic red tape has all but precluded efficiency and substantially increased the cost of the program. In these times of tight budgets funding a new, expensive, and not terribly productive program may be unsustainable. On the other hand, shifting the priorities of the disability program from DSI to eliminating the hearing office backlog certainly should benefit Attorney Advisers currently in the hearing offices.

In addition to cost, we fear that operational errors have significantly limited the effectiveness of the FedRO program. The FedROs were not located locally; rather they were placed in Falls Church, depriving the program of many, many highly qualified individuals, the Agency’s attorneys in the field. The decisional independence of FedROs has been seriously eroded by the influence of the “medical units”, the “quality assurance process” and even the FedRO management structure. Additionally, FedROs have been discouraged from producing high quality, legally defensible decisions and are burdened with an inadequate decision drafting format.

The Future

We again emphasize that we have no definitive knowledge regarding the fate of the FedRO program. Commissioner Astrue could decide to continue it, alter it to enhance its viability, or terminate it. Nonetheless, we believe it is a possibility that it will be terminated. What is the impact of the potential demise of the FedRO program on Attorney Advisers in hearing offices? Obviously, the demise of this program would be a blow to those who hoped to become FedROs in the future. However, whether or not the FedRO program continues, the crisis at the hearing level must be addressed.

Can SSA afford to continue to ignore us? Will SSA continue to ignore its own history or will it finally recognize that the Senior Attorney Program was instrumental in eliminating the backlog of the 1990’s? Will SSA again recognize that we are the solution? We are doing our utmost to make SSA and Congress understand what is in their best interest and the best interest of the claimants and the public at large. Hopefully, SSA will finally listen and implement our improved version of the Senior Attorney Program.
                                 
                                                   - Jim Hill

[Retfed]

I hope no one bought a house or a condo on the basis of the FedRO positions. Production stinks costs are out of control. the program doesn't work. At the risk of causing pain the people in the FedRo program are as far from first class as one can get. I expect they will be closed out by September 07. Yes they have to change the law. They changed it to set it up, they can change it to shut it down.