A new report released Friday by the Social Security Administration revealed that the agency paid out $2 billion in questionable disability claims over the last seven years, resulting in some 25,000 people receiving benefits who may not have qualified.
Of the 275 sample cases examined, 216 had quality issues, and five should have been rejected immediately. Seven were too generous, one was not generous enough and half of them required more information for an accurate decision to be made, reported The Washington Times. Of the 275 examined, only 31 cases were properly processed.
Many of the recipients are still receiving benefits, and the costs of the erroneous decisions are expected to grow by $300 million next year, according to The Hill.
The investigation focused on disability claims approved by 44 administrative law judges, who were targeted due to their high case approval rates, reported the Washington Times.
Those 44 comprise about 4 percent of the administrative law judges who deal with such decisions, and their high approval rates drew negative attention from some lawmakers, who questioned whether the decisions were either rubber-stamped or not based on a thorough enough evaluation.
The report did, however, find that the agency has improved its oversight of the administrative law judges.
The investigation was requested after Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, became suspicious of the abnormally high number of approvals.
"In failing to take meaningful disciplinary action at the Social Security Administration, even after the most egregious cases of mismanagement, taxpayers are left to wonder, who is looking after their tax dollars," Issa told the Associated Press.
Social Security Administration spokeswoman, LaVenia J LaVelle, told the AP that judges make decisions independently of the agency, saying, "The primary purpose for the ALJs qualified decisional independence is to enhance public confidence in the essential fairness of an agency's decision-making process."
