Social Security Disability
Additional Performance Measures and Better Cost Estimates Could Help Improve SSA's Efforts to Eliminate Its Hearings Backlog
GAO-09-398, Sep 9, 2009
Additional Materials:
Contact:
(SSA) has experienced processing delays and significant backlogs of disability claims at the hearings level. In May 2007, SSA began implementing a plan for eliminating the hearings backlog entitled Summary of Initiatives to Eliminate the SSA Hearings Backlog (the Plan). In response to a congressional request, GAO (1) examined the Plan's potential to eliminate the hearings-level backlog, (2) determined the extent to which the Plan included components of sound planning, and (3) identified potential unintended effects of the Plan on hearings-level operations and other aspects of the disability process. To address these objectives, GAO analyzed SSA data, conducted a risk analysis, assessed the Plan and its update--the May 2009 Draft Appomattox Plan--using planning criteria identified in previous GAO work, interviewed SSA officials, and conducted site visits in three SSA regions.
SSA's Plan should help the agency reduce its hearings-level backlog, but the likelihood that SSA will eliminate the backlog within its projected time-frame depends on the extent to which SSA's assumptions for improved administrative law judge (ALJ) hiring, availability, and productivity are achieved in practice. Both SSA and GAO believe that the agency has about a 78 percent chance of eliminating the backlog, that is, reducing the number of hearings-level pending claims below 466,000 claims, by the end of fiscal year 2013--SSA's target date--if those assumptions are fully realized. However, SSA's assumptions project higher levels of performance achieved than recent experience--from fiscal year 2008 to April 2009. ALJ productivity improvements are especially important to SSA's reaching its goal. The likelihood that SSA will eliminate the backlog by its target date changes under different scenarios for achieving its ALJ hiring, availability, and productivity goals. If SSA achieves its average ALJ productivity, but not its ALJ hiring and availability goals, GAO estimated that SSA's chances are reduced from about 78 percent to about 53 percent. Conversely, if SSA achieves its goals for ALJ hiring and availability, but not for average productivity, its chances are about 34 percent. If SSA is unable to achieve any of its ALJ workforce and performance goals, the likelihood of the agency eliminating the hearings-level backlog by its target date drops to about 14 percent. SSA's Plan includes important elements of the six components of sound planning GAO identified in previous work, but does not provide some key management information that could facilitate effective plan management. SSA did not fully address elements of two components. Specifically, the Plan does not include performance goals and measures for about half of the initiatives and cost estimates for many, which would allow SSA to evaluate the initiatives' effect on the hearings-level backlog and determine resource allocations and return on investment. Although the Plan does not identify implementation risks or strategies to address them, SSA officials said they are developing a system that will aid in creating formal performance goals and measures and risk analysis, several of which SSA plans to release in the fall of 2009. The Plan could have unintended effects on SSA offices involved in the disability process. For example, the Plan's initiatives to increase the number of hearings-level decisions could affect decisional quality and accuracy, and increase workloads in offices that are responsible for reviewing appeals of hearing office decisions, processing payments for claims, and conducting continuing disability reviews to determine whether beneficiaries remain eligible for benefits. Although SSA has developed plans to address increased workloads related to appeals of hearing decisions and monitors other disability workloads, it does not have a systematic approach to identify and address unintended effects caused by Plan initiatives over the course of the Plan.
Status Legend:
Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
- In Process
- Open
- Closed - implemented
- Closed - not implemented
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help SSA monitor progress and evaluate individual Plan initiatives' effect on the hearings-level backlog, inform its decisions about resource allocations for eliminating this backlog, and minimize adverse effects of the Plan's implementation, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should develop performance goals and measures for initiatives that currently do not have them.
Agency Affected: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: SSA said that the agency has performance measures and goals for some initiatives and is in the process of developing others. It also said that some of the plan's initiatives are not conducive to a performance target or metric, such as those automation enhancements, which remain in a planning and development stage, or initiatives such as improved HO management training. SSA pointed out that the agency tracks milestones on these initiatives to ensure they remain on target for an on-schedule implementation. GAO commends SSA for working to develop performance measures and goals for some of the remaining initiatives. Regarding those for which SSA does not plan to develop such measures, we continue to believe that while tracking milestones for initiatives provides important information on their status, performance goals and measures are needed to gauge the success of certain initiatives by comparing outcomes with expected results.
Recommendation: To help SSA monitor progress and evaluate individual Plan initiatives' effect on the hearings-level backlog, inform its decisions about resource allocations for eliminating this backlog, and minimize adverse effects of the Plan's implementation, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should develop cost estimates for the initiatives SSA considers critical to eliminating the hearings-level backlog in addition to the time savings estimates already developed.
Agency Affected: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: SSA disagreed with GAO's assertion that the agency did not develop cost estimates for the backlog reduction plan, and noted that it conducted a full evaluation of the costs and savings associated with implementing all major aspects of the Plan. It also noted that SSA's fiscal year 2009 and 2010 budget estimate requests incorporate the full costs and savings related to implementation of the plan. SSA also stated that it has updated its plan and budget estimates for FY 2010 and beyond to take into account workload changes driven by the current economic downturn and other changes in performance based on ongoing monitoring of the implementation of its plan initiatives. It said that it will continue to update its plans and budget estimates as needed. However, we believe that it is also important to develop cost estimates for individual Plan initiatives over the entire course of the Plan--through fiscal year 2013--because it would allow SSA to determine which initiatives provide the best return on investment as it moves forward with Plan implementation. Such information is critical to making informed decisions regarding the most effective use of funds to eliminate the backlog.
Recommendation: To help SSA monitor progress and evaluate individual Plan initiatives' effect on the hearings-level backlog, inform its decisions about resource allocations for eliminating this backlog, and minimize adverse effects of the Plan's implementation, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should move forward with formalizing agency risk assessments associated with the Plan's implementation, including assessing both risks that would hinder the Plan's success and risks that could cause adverse effects or trade-offs related to hearings-level performance and other SSA operations, along with mitigating strategies.
Agency Affected: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Comments: SSA noted that it is being proactive in identifying risks. It said that the agency has monitored all initiatives closely, and has tried to assess issues that could prevent the success of an initiative and plan mitigation strategies if possible. It said that while the agency may not have done "formal" risk analysis for every initiative, it considered risks that may be encountered and what effect the initiative may have on all of the agency's components, and put strategies in place to deal with these risks. In future releases, the Project Management Office, through its Disability Adjudication Reporting and Evaluation System, will address potential risks, as well as formulate possible mitigation strategies for each risk. SSA noted that this activity must be balanced with the urgency to take action to help those who have long waited for a hearing decision. However, GAO continues to believe that SSA needs to complete the steps it has outlined to formalize risk assessments associated with the Plan's implementation.