FAQ

Not really.  There are many reasons for this.  Firstly, hearings are tape recorded and physical movements won’t show up on audio.  As well, any physical limitations that are the basis of a disability claim must have medical records to back it up, not just an ALJ’s observations. Courts have discounted “sit and squirm” opinions from ALJs who “eyeball” the client, and say they have no back problems, for example, because they sit in a hearing for two hours in no obvious discomfort.  DDS is supposed to consider the claimant’s capacity to perform work activities on a sustained basis, not just on what they can or cannot do on a one-time basis.  (See Social Security Rulings 96-8p and 96-9p) https://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/rulings/rulfind1.html#YRT1996)

ALJ hearings may be conducted using video teleconferencing (VTC) equipment, rather than in-person, if there is equipment available to conduct a VTC hearing and if this would be more efficient than conducting an appearance in person. Applicants have a right to object to a VTC hearing if using the VTC model would cause undue hardship or for other reasons specified in HALLEX regulations. 

Here is a link to SSA data on length of time it takes to get a hearing, by hearing office:  https://www.ssa.gov/appeals/DataSets/01_NetStat_Report.html.   You can also see how many video vs. in person hearings a particular office does, though there is much local variation on how cases are assigned to in-person vs. video dockets. While VTC hearings generally come up quicker, this is in the context of long wait times for hearing scheduling generally.  

It is our opinion that all applicants at the hearing level should be represented by someone who is knowledgeable about preparing and presenting claims at the ALJ level.  ODAR will have a staffer who will assist with the equipment, but not much more than that. An advocate will be able to directly examine the applicant and cross examine any experts that are present, e.g. vocational and/or medical experts.

RFC forms are very useful and can be a vehicle for the treating source to provide medical opinion evidence, forcing the ALJ to consider it.  Sometimes the ALJ will discount the RFC form if he/she feels that it is not supported by the medical records.  For instance, sometimes a doctor will give the opinion that the applicant “can sit for 30 minutes” but nowhere in the medical record is there anything about this at patient appointments. So, be aware of that.  Also, be sure that the answers on the form are internally consistent. 

For the second question, once DDS determines the applicant has met a Listing (at Step 3 of the Sequential Evaluation), DDS stops developing the claim for other impairments.  DDS looks at the applicant’s RFC at Step 4 and Step 5.  The applicant’s RFC is determined and compared to the physical and mental demands of the past relevant work (Step 4). When it is determined that the applicant cannot perform past relevant work, RFC, age, education and past work experience must be considered to determine if there is other less demanding work the applicant can do.

Finally, RFC forms which are designed with space for the physician to provide their medical opinion, and not merely a form with check off boxes, is most effective. 

In order to address the question of whether an applicant is capable of returning to work performed within the past 15 years, the ALJ will generally call a VE to testify. The VE is usually a licensed professional counselor, a vocational rehabilitation specialist, or another professional whose career has involved job placement, career counseling and working with people with disabilities. Although the VE is called by the ALJ, the VE is neither a government nor an applicant’s witness. The VE’s task is to offer a neutral opinion based on (1) the evidence and (2) the ALJ’s determinations as to the applicant’s functional limitations. The VE reviews the documents in the file which pertain to work, e.g. detailed earnings record, disability report, and work history report.  The ALJ will create a hypothetical for the purpose of eliciting the VE’s opinion on the applicant’s capacity to return to past work (Step 4) or perform other work in the national economy (Step 5). For more information on cross examining the VE, please contact Pam Heine at the SOAR TA Center, pheine@prainc.com.  Read more here: https://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/hallex/I-02/I-2-6-74.html.

For the second question, the job must exist in significant numbers in either the national or local economy, where the applicant lives. Read more at https://www.ssa.gov/appeals/public_experts/Vocational_Experts_(VE)_Handbook-508.pdf.

No, it is our opinion that all applicants should be represented at the hearing by an individual who is knowledgeable about Social Security's decision-making process at the ALJ level, whether it be a lawyer, paralegal, or a SOAR case worker. Administrative Law Judges follow fairly strict rules about how to decide disability cases and what evidence can be considered. Although applicants can represent themselves “pro se” (i.e. “for oneself”), it is in their best interest to secure representation.  The applicant may find it difficult to learn enough about Social Security law to advocate for themselves professionally at the hearing.

Yes, the applicant will have a chance to speak for him/herself. The representative will ask the applicant questions which is called “direct examination.”  This gives the applicant a chance to tell his or her story. Also, the ALJ will often begin the hearing by asking the applicant questions. Remember, the ALJ level is the first time the applicant is seen face-to-face by SSA.  The earlier stages are paper reviews.

HALLEX (Hearings, Appeals and Litigation Law Manual) is a publication from the Social Security Administration's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR). ODAR administers hearings and appeals for people seeking reviews of their applications for disability benefits. HALLEX contains policy statements from the SSA's Appeals Council, as well as procedures directed to lower levels of the SSA for carrying out the SSA's guiding principles

This is definitely something we hear quite a bit and a very pervasive rumor that an applicant has to be denied X number or times, or can only win on appeal. The truth is that if the evidence is in the initial filing showing that an applicant meets the criteria for SSI or SSDI, he/she will be approved at the initial stage. Using the SOAR model results in higher approval rates (see our national outcomes) because we focus on getting all of the information in the file from the beginning, whereas many people who are eligible for benefits are denied because they don’t have assistance in gathering this documentation.

Some lawyers who take fees for assisting with disability claims specialize in appeals and don’t provide the evidence in the initial stage – they wait for the application to be denied and then work on the appeal. For an application at the appeal stage to be successful, the vast majority of the time it requires new evidence that wasn’t originally presented (there are some cases that are overturned due to oversights at DDS). So, it’s not that DDS wants to deny the case from the beginning, they just didn’t have the right information. It doesn’t save them any money to automatically deny people and then send them to appeal (in fact, it actually costs them more money in adjudicator time, medical records requests, and consultative exams).

All of that said, we understand why people think this is true. The overall national approval rate for SSI/SSDI (without SOAR) is only 29%. So yes, that means 71% of people are denied. It's not possible to know how many applicants needed more evidence and how many just didn't meet the disability criteria, but it certainly leads to many myths about the process.

We recommend against using the SSA-8001 form for a SOAR application because it contains less comprehensive information about an applicant’s income and resources. As such, the applicant would still need to complete an in-person or phone interview with SSA in order to complete the SSA-8000. By completing the SSA-8000 and turning it in to SSA, you can often avoid the need for this interview.

If you find that your local SSA office is not accepting the SSA-8000 from in lieu of an interview, I encourage you to reach out to your SOAR TA Center Liaison and SOAR State Lead so that they can provide local assistance.

This is a great question! While DDS does not have a way to process records received via disk, this sounds like a good opportunity to speak with them about signing up for Electronic Records Express, which allows you to upload medical records directly into an applicant’s file from your computer without having to print them. I recommend reaching out to your DDS Professional Relations Officer, or your local SOAR contact, for details on how to register.  This should be a quick process, allowing you to upload these records without delaying your current case.

All of our resources are open-access and free to use when helping applicants. However, we request that you only use the “SOAR” label at Social Security when you are working with individuals who are experiencing or at-risk for homelessness. Read more about how we define homelessness and at-risk. If the applicants you assist do not fit this criteria, you are still welcome to use any of our materials that you find helpful, without marking the application as “SOAR” at Social Security.