Aspects of Disability Decision Making: Data and Materials

2002 In Barnhart v. Walton, 535 U.S. 212 (2002), the Supreme Court upheld SSA’s interpretation of the12-month duration of disability requirement in the statutory definition of disability. Walton hadclaimed that the 12-month requirement was met if an individual had a medical impairment thatlasted for 12 months, even if the person’s inability to work did not last for 12 months. SSA interpretedthe law as requiring that the inability to work must last, or be expected to last, 12 months.In its decision, the Court agreed with SSA. It also upheld SSA’s longstanding policy precluding afinding of disability when a claimant returns to work within the 12‐month period after onset ofan impairment and prior to the agency making the initial decision on the application.2003 In Barnhart v. Thomas, 540 U.S. 20 (2003), the Supreme Court upheld SSA’s interpretation of thestatutory definition of disability as it related to past work. When finding that a claimant was notdisabled because he or she could return to his or her previous work, SSA did so without investigatingwhether the person’s previous work existed in significant numbers in the national economy.Thomas had argued that the statutory provision that referred to work that exists in significantnumbers applied to decisions based on the ability to do past work.SSA implemented a new business process to streamline updates to its Listing of Impairments andto increase outside participation in developing listings’ revisions. The initiative called for:■■greater internal agency review of newly revised listings;■■publishing Advance Notices of Proposed Rule Making to seek public input before proposingspecific changes, and■■holding public outreach events giving medical experts, claimants, and advocates an opportunityto comment on the agency’s medical criteria.2004 The Social Security Protection Act of 2004 (P.L. 108‐203) included a range of provisions, some ofwhich were related to the work incentives and assistive services stemming from The Ticket to Workand Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999. These included a technical amendment to the TicketAct, expanded waiver authority in connection with demonstration projects, and a requirementthat SSA issue receipts to disabled beneficiaries each time they reported their work and earnings.The Act also made benefits planning, assistance and outreach services and protection and advocacyservices available to beneficiaries in SSI 1619(b) States, to those individuals receiving a (SSI)State supplement payment, and to those in an extended period of Medicare eligibility.SSA began to roll out a new electronic disability claim processing system. The system, renamedAccelerated Electronic Disability (AeDib), used a paperless electronic claim folder to store medicalrecords and other documents that had always been maintained in a paper folder. It featured:■■■■■■■■Internet applications;electronic data collection;electronic folders, accessible to all users, to store all claim information; andautomated case processing and management system.2005 In January 2005, Mississippi became the first State to implement Social Security’s new fully electronicdisability application process under its AeDib initiative.The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109 171) required SSA to review a specific percentage offavorable initial SSI disability and blindness decisions made by DDSs with respect to individualsaged 18 and older. The reviews would be conducted before any implementation action. The lawrequired SSA to review 20 percent of the allowances in 2006, 40 percent in 2007, and 50 percentin 2008 and thereafter.Aspects of Disability Decision Making: Data and Materials 99