SSA Disability Benefits:

Enhanced Policies and Management Focus Needed to Address Potential Physician-Assisted Fraud

GAO-15-19: Published: Nov 10, 2014. Publicly Released: Dec 10, 2014.

Multimedia:

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Daniel Bertoni
(202) 512-7215
bertonid@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

What GAO Found

The Social Security Administration (SSA) has policies and procedures in place for detecting and preventing fraud with regard to disability benefit claims. However, GAO identified a number of areas that could leave the agency vulnerable to physician-assisted fraud and other fraudulent claims:

  • SSA relies heavily on front-line staff in the offices of its disability determination services (DDS)—which have responsibility for reviewing medical evidence—to detect and prevent potential fraud. However, staff said it is difficult to detect suspicious patterns across claims, as directed by SSA policy, given the large number of claims and volume of medical information they review. Moreover, DDS offices generally assign claims randomly, so staff said it would only be by chance that they would review evidence from the same physician.
  • SSA and, in turn, DDS performance measures that focus on prompt processing can create a disincentive for front-line staff to report potential fraud because of the time it requires to develop a fraud referral. Four of the five DDS offices GAO visited count time that staff spend on documenting potential fraud and developing fraud referrals against their processing time. Some staff at these DDS offices said this creates a reluctance to report potential fraud.
  • The extent of anti-fraud training for staff varied among the five offices GAO visited and was often limited. SSA requires all DDSs to provide training to newly hired staff that includes general information on how to identify potential fraud, but does not require additional training. The five DDS offices GAO visited varied in whether staff received refresher training and its content—such as how to spot suspicious medical evidence from physicians—and staff at all levels said they needed more training on these issues.
  • SSA has not fully evaluated the risk associated with accepting medical evidence from physicians who are barred from participating in federal health programs. Although information from these physicians is not necessarily fraudulent, it could be associated with questionable disability determinations.

SSA has launched several initiatives to detect and prevent potential fraud, but their success is hampered by a lack of planning, data, and coordination. For instance, SSA is developing computer models that can draw from recent fraud cases to anticipate potentially fraudulent claims going forward. This effort has the potential to address vulnerabilities with existing fraud detection practices by, for example, helping to identify suspicious patterns of medical evidence. However, SSA has not yet articulated a plan for implementation, assigned responsibility for this initiative within the agency, or identified how the agency will obtain key pieces of data to identify physicians who are currently not tracked in existing claims' management systems. Furthermore, SSA is developing other initiatives, such as a centralized fraud prevention unit and analysis to detect patterns in disability appeals cases that could indicate fraud. However, these initiatives are still in the early stages of development and it is not clear how they will be coordinated or work with existing detection activities.

Why GAO Did This Study

SSA relies on medical evidence to determine whether the millions of new claimants each year qualify for disability benefits. This evidence—and those who provide it—have been the subject of intense scrutiny as questions have been raised about the potential for fraud schemes that include falsified medical evaluations. GAO was asked to study physician-assisted fraud in SSA's disability programs.

GAO reviewed (1) how well SSA's policies and procedures are designed and implemented to detect and prevent physician-assisted fraud, and (2) the steps SSA is taking to improve its ability to prevent physician-assisted fraud. GAO reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations, visited 5 of the 54 DDS offices that were selected to obtain geographic and office structure variation, and analyzed DDS data to identify whether federally sanctioned physicians (as of the end of January 2014) may have submitted evidence on behalf of claimants. GAO also interviewed SSA officials, as well as private disability insurers and others knowledgeable about SSA's programs to identify key practices for fraud prevention.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends SSA identify ways to remove potential disincentives for detecting and referring potential fraud, enhance its training efforts, evaluate the threat of physician-assisted fraud, and ensure that new and existing fraud efforts are coordinated. SSA agreed with four of our five recommendations, partially agreed with one, and noted plans to address all of them.

For more information, contact Daniel Bertoni at (202) 512-7215 or bertonid@gao.gov

Recommendations for Executive Action

  1. Status: Open

    Comments: SSA partially agreed with this recommendation, citing that their employees take their stewardship responsibilities seriously and that field office and disability determination services (DDS) employees are the agency's first and best line of defense against fraud. In 2016, the agency reported that it was working with experts in its OIG and Office of Anti-Fraud Programs to develop and disseminate promising practices on identifying and reporting fraud. We will close this recommendation once SSA takes steps to review its standards for assessing DDS performance and disseminates the best practices it is developing.

    Recommendation: To improve the ability of the agency to detect and prevent potential physician-assisted fraud, and to address potential disincentives for staff to detect and prevent physician-assisted fraud, SSA should review the standards used to assess DDS performance; and develop and distribute promising practices to incentivize staff to better balance the goal of processing claims promptly with the equally important goal of identifying and reporting evidence of potential fraud.

    Agency Affected: Social Security Administration

  2. Status: Closed - Implemented

    Comments: SSA reported taking a number of actions to remind staff of existing policies and the importance of reporting potentially fraudulent claims. For instance, it provided related information to DDS administrators in several meetings in 2014 and 2015, and included reminders in its mandatory anti-fraud training in 2015.

    Recommendation: To improve the ability of the agency to detect and prevent potential physician-assisted fraud, and to ensure that the agency captures complete information on suspicious claims, SSA should issue guidance to remind DDSs of its existing policy to report all claims with potentially fraudulent medical evidence to the SSA's Office of the Inspector General (SSA OIG), even if sufficient evidence exists to deny a claim.

    Agency Affected: Social Security Administration

  3. Status: Closed - Implemented

    Comments: SSA reported taking a number of steps to enhance its training efforts. In 2014, the agency and its OIG developed and released video on-demand training for all SSA and DDS staff, providing an overview of SSA's anti-fraud efforts and of employees' responsibility to report suspected fraud. SSA also issued a letter to all DDSs outlining the agency's fraud procedures and providing links to available anti-fraud training tools. In 2014 and 2015, SSA's Office of Quality Review held several fraud training classes for its employees. In addition, SSA reported it developed an ongoing training strategy in 2015 in which the agency will work with its OIG to provide training to employees on OIG fraud findings and trends to keep staff aware of shifting schemes to defraud SSA's disability programs.

    Recommendation: To improve the ability of the agency to detect and prevent potential physician-assisted fraud, and to help front-line staff identify potentially fraudulent activity, SSA should enhance its training efforts by ensuring it provides fraud-related refresher training to all DDS employees on a regular basis. Such training should include the identification of suspicious medical evidence and providers, as well as the processes and procedures for reporting such information. To facilitate its efforts, the agency could coordinate with the SSA OIG and draw on the type of training provided by Cooperative Disability Investigations' units.

    Agency Affected: Social Security Administration

  4. Status: Open

    Comments: As of 2016, SSA reported that it was pursuing several options to address the potential risks of medical evidence submitted by sanctioned physicians. This included determining how it could use licensure information from the List of Excluded Individuals and Entities. SSA stated that it believes the best opportunity to further evaluate the possible review of the license statuses of medical evidence providers is in conjunction with the implementation of the National Vendor File, part of the national Disability Case Processing System, which is under development. In addition, SSA reported it had drafted two Social Security Rulings to define fraud and to provide processes for disregarding evidence and making redeterminations in disability claims when there is reason to believe that fraudulent evidence was provided. We will close this recommendation once SSA articulates a strategy for using license status information in the vendor file and it finalizes its rulings.

    Recommendation: To improve the ability of the agency to detect and prevent potential physician-assisted fraud, and to address the potential risks associated with medical evidence submitted by sanctioned physicians, SSA should evaluate the threat posed by this information and, if warranted, consider changes to its policies and procedures.

    Agency Affected: Social Security Administration

  5. Status: Open

    Priority recommendation

    Comments: Since fiscal year 2015, SSA has taken several steps that will help the agency to combat fraud, waste, and abuse. SSA established the Office of Anti-Fraud Programs to provide centralized oversight and accountability for the agency's initiatives, which, in consultation with the Office of the Inspector General and other SSA components, will lead the development of SSA's anti-fraud initiatives and activities. This includes efforts to mitigate fraud through data analytics that utilize SSA's existing data systems. SSA developed a strategic plan for fiscal years 2016-2018 to guide its anti-fraud efforts that includes the use of data analytics. However, this plan does not specifically address actions to combat potential physician-assisted fraud. As of April 2017, SSA stated that it continued to develop a fraud management strategy that is consistent with the leading practices identified in GAO's report. Once the strategy is complete, SSA plans to conduct a fraud risk assessment on its major lines of business, beginning with the disability program in fiscal year 2017. We will continue to monitor SSA's progress to identify and prevent fraud schemes that include physicians.

    Recommendation: To improve the ability of the agency to detect and prevent potential physician-assisted fraud, and to help ensure new initiatives that use analytics to identify potential fraud schemes are successful, SSA should develop an implementation plan that identifies both short- and long-term actions, including: (1) timeframes for implementation; (2) resources and staffing needs; (3) data requirements, e.g., the collection of unique medical provider information; (4) how technology improvement will be integrated into existing technology improvements such as the Disability Case Processing System and National Vendor File; and (5) how different initiatives will interact and support each other.

    Agency Affected: Social Security Administration

 

Explore the full database of GAO's Open Recommendations »

Oct 18, 2017

Aug 24, 2017

Jul 20, 2017

Apr 24, 2017

Dec 20, 2016

Nov 21, 2016

Sep 14, 2016

Sep 8, 2016

May 5, 2016

Looking for more? Browse all our products here