Report to the Ranking Minority

Member, Committee on Governmental

Affairs, U.S. Senate

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

June 2001 SOCIAL SECURITY

ADMINISTRATION

Status of Achieving

Key Outcomes and

Addressing Major

Management

Challenges

GAO-01-778
Page i GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Letter 1

Appendix I Observations on the Social Security Administration’s

Efforts to Address Its Major Management Challenges 22

Appendix II Comments From the Social Security Administration 30

Appendix III GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 35

Table

Table 1: Major Management Challenges 22

Abbreviations

CDR Continuing Disability Review

DI Disability Insurance

ESF Earnings Suspense File

GPRA Government Performance and Results Act

HPI Hearings Process Improvement

OASI Old Age and Survivors Insurance

OIG Office of Inspector General

OMB Office of Management and Budget

SSA Social Security Administration

SSI Supplemental Security Income

SSN Social Security number

WC workers’ compensation

Contents
Page 1 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

June 15, 2001

The Honorable Fred Thompson

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

Dear Senator Thompson:

As you requested, we reviewed the Social Security Administration’s (SSA)

fiscal year 2000 performance report and fiscal year 2002 performance plan

required by the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA)

to assess SSA’s progress in achieving selected key outcomes that you

identified as important mission areas for the agency.1

 We addressed the

same outcomes in our June 2000 review of SSA’s fiscal year 1999

performance report and fiscal year 2001 performance plan to provide a

baseline by which to measure the agency’s performance from year to year.2

These five selected key outcomes are:

• Providing timely, accurate, and useful information and services to the

public;

• Making disability determinations more timely and accurate;

• Reducing long-term disability benefits because people return to the

workplace;

• Providing timely information to decisionmakers to address program policy

issues such as long-term trust fund solvency; and

• Reducing fraud, waste, and error in the Supplemental Security Income

(SSI) program.

As agreed, using the selected key outcomes for SSA as a framework, we

(1) assessed the progress SSA has made in achieving these outcomes and

its strategies for achieving them; and (2) compared SSA’s fiscal year 2000

performance report and fiscal year 2002 performance plan with its prioryear performance report and plan for these outcomes. Additionally, we

agreed to analyze how SSA has addressed its major management

 1

Our report is one of a series on the 24 Chief Financial Officers Act agencies’ fiscal year

2000 performance reports and fiscal year 2002 performance plans.

2

Observations on the Social Security Administration’s Fiscal Year 1999 Performance

Report and Fiscal Year 2001 Performance Plan (GAO/HEHS-00-126R, June 30, 2000).

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548
Page 2 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

challenges, including the governmentwide high-risk areas of strategic

human capital management and information security that we and SSA’s

Inspector General identified. Appendix I provides detailed information on

how SSA addressed these challenges. Appendix II contains SSA’s

comments on a draft of our report.

SSA reported generally making progress toward achieving its five key

outcomes in fiscal year 2000, albeit to varying degrees. SSA’s current

strategies generally provide a clear picture of its future plans to achieve

the five key outcomes, as outlined below.

Planned Outcome: Providing timely, accurate, and useful information and

services to the public. SSA reported mixed success in meeting its intended

goals related to this key outcome in fiscal year 2000. The pace of SSA’s

progress was unclear in some areas due to continued revisions3

 to prior

indicators and goals and SSA’s inability to provide timely performance

data. For example, SSA lowered and met its goal for the volume of 800-

number calls processed, but did not report on its progress toward

improving 800-number service accuracy because data were not yet

available. SSA’s strategies for meeting its fiscal year 2002 goals included

training customer service staff in ways to improve accuracy on error-prone

issues. However, SSA merged two accuracy indicators, without sufficient

justification, in its fiscal year 2002 plan—payment accuracy for the Old

Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and Disability Insurance (DI)

programs—which may affect SSA’s ability to sufficiently monitor and

manage performance.

Planned Outcome: Making disability determinations more timely and

accurate. SSA reported mixed success in meeting its intended goals

related to this key outcome in fiscal year 2000. Also, the pace of SSA’s

progress was unclear in some areas due to continued revisions to prior

indicators and goals, and SSA’s inability to provide timely performance

data. SSA lowered the targets for about half of its goals and still did not

meet several of them, including those for the volume and timeliness of

 3

Agencies are permitted to revise the performance targets in their performance plans—

based upon congressional action, the occurrence of unanticipated exigencies,

consideration of actual performance data from the prior year, and other reasons—under

GPRA as implemented by OMB Circular No. A-11, Part 2: “Preparation and Submission of

Strategic Plans, Annual Performance Plans, and Annual Program Performance Reports,”

July 19, 2000.

Results in Brief
Page 3 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

disability hearings. SSA’s strategies for meeting its fiscal year 2002 goals in

this area were generally clear, and included increasing the decision

authority of its disability examiners and further revising its hearings

processes.

Planned Outcome: Reducing long-term disability benefits because people

return to the workplace. In fiscal year 2000, SSA reported that it made

progress in this area and met most of its performance goals. However,

SSA’s measures were mainly output-oriented, and did not directly convey

SSA’s progress toward attaining this outcome. SSA’s fiscal year 2002

strategies in this area are more results-oriented and include goals and

measures that are more clearly linked to achieving its objectives. However,

SSA has not yet developed performance goals for several indicators,

including its key outcome goal for the number of disabled SSI

beneficiaries no longer receiving cash benefits due to work.

Planned Outcome: Providing timely information to decisionmakers to

address program policy issues such as long-term trust fund solvency. SSA

reported that it made progress in this area and met most of its

performance goals in fiscal year 2000. SSA’s fiscal year 2002 strategies for

this key outcome are also more results-oriented than in prior years. The

plan also contains goals and measures that are more clearly linked to

achieving its objectives and should help SSA better track customer

satisfaction with its research products.

Planned Outcome: Reducing fraud, waste, and error in the SSI program.

SSA reported mixed success in meeting its intended goals for this key

outcome in fiscal year 2000. SSA’s fiscal year 2002 strategies could also be

improved by including additional indicators of its antifraud efforts, such as

tracking the number of civil and monetary penalties levied. Furthermore,

some recent plan revisions may impede SSA’s ability to improve SSI

program integrity—for example, none of the components of a new SSI

debt-recovery indicator measures debt actually collected by SSA in a given

year.

SSA’s fiscal year 2000 performance report and fiscal year 2002 plan include

improvements over their prior-year counterparts. For example, the fiscal

year 2000 report used more graphics to present a clear picture of SSA’s

progress, while the fiscal year 2002 plan includes additional clarifying

baseline data, definitions, and data sources useful for tracking

performance. However, SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report lacked data for about

18 percent of its key outcome goals and contained revisions or deletions of

other measures, which affected our ability to assess agency performance.
Page 4 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Finally, SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report did not sufficiently convey the

agency’s progress toward improving data credibility. Our prior work

showed that data credibility issues created vulnerabilities for the

performance measures for nearly all of SSA’s key outcomes. Weaknesses

in SSA’s information system internal controls—which we have previously

reported on—heighten the need for additional attention to this area.

SSA reported making progress in addressing the major management

challenges identified by GAO, which generally encompass the agency’s five

key outcomes. SSA’s current plan includes one goal and several

performance indicators to address the governmentwide high-risk area of

strategic human capital management. Several of these indicators respond

to our prior recommendations that SSA take additional actions to ensure

that it has sufficient staff with the proper skills to address burgeoning

future workloads. Many of SSA’s human capital-related performance

measure goals have yet to be developed, however. SSA reported that its

strategies in this area focus on better aligning how it manages human

capital with its newly revised strategic plan to help meet its longer-term

resource and workload challenges, as specified in its 2010 Service Vision.

For example, SSA’s fiscal year 2002 strategies include leadership training

opportunities to address expected management retirements, an area we

have reported that SSA needed to address.4

 SSA also reported that it is

addressing governmentwide high-risk information security issues by

developing strategies such as improving security awareness and training

efforts, deploying new security technology, introducing new performance

measures for information systems security to be reported to monitoring

authorities, and taking actions to ensure that its assets are protected from

physical and cyber threats.5

 However, information infrastructure

weaknesses persist, and SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan does not include

specific goals, indicators, or performance measures related to this risk.

SSA’s performance report discussed progress in resolving the management

challenges we identified as facing the agency: playing an active research

and policy development role, improving the disability determination

process and returning people to work, sustaining management and

oversight of the high-risk SSI program, and better positioning itself for

 4

Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Social Security Administration

(GAO-01-261, Jan. 2001).

5

In 1999, we named “strengthening controls to protect SSA information” as a SSA-specific

challenge. To eliminate redundancy, we have included SSA’s activities in regard to this

issue under our governmentwide information security management challenge.
Page 5 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

future service delivery challenges. SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan also includes

specific goals, strategies, and measures for addressing these challenges.

However, for some challenges—disability determinations, return-to-work,

and SSI program management and oversight—additional actions and goals

are needed.

We make recommendations in this report that SSA take steps to ensure

that essential data and other key information are included in future

performance reports and plans, as well as develop specific goals and

measures to address continuing information security weaknesses. In

commenting on our draft report, SSA generally agreed with our

conclusions and recommendations. The agency also provided technical

comments, which we incorporated where appropriate. SSA’s comments

are printed in appendix II.

GPRA is intended to shift the focus of government decision-making,

management, and accountability from activities and processes to the

results and outcomes achieved by federal programs. New and valuable

information on the plans, goals, and strategies of federal agencies has been

provided since federal agencies began implementing GPRA. Under GPRA,

annual performance plans are to clearly inform the Congress and the

public of (1) the annual performance goals for agencies’ major programs

and activities, (2) the measures that will be used to gauge performance,

(3) the strategies and resources required to achieve the performance goals,

and (4) the procedures that will be used to verify and validate

performance information. These annual plans, issued soon after

transmittal of the president’s budget, provide a direct linkage between an

agency’s longer-term goals and mission and day-to-day activities.6

 Annual

performance reports are to subsequently report on the degree to which

performance goals were met. The issuance of the agencies’ performance

reports, which were due by March 31, represents a new and potentially

more substantive phase in the implementation of GPRA—the opportunity

to assess federal agencies’ actual performance for the prior fiscal year and

to consider what steps are needed to improve performance and reduce

costs in the future.7

 6

The fiscal year 2002 performance plan is the fourth of these annual plans under GPRA.

7

The fiscal year 2000 performance report is the second of these annual reports under

GPRA.

Background
Page 6 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

SSA oversees three major programs that provide benefits to more than 50

million recipients: OASI, DI, and SSI. SSA’s fiscal year 1999 expenditures

of more than $400 billion constituted over one-fifth of all federal

disbursements. This amount is expected to grow over the coming years as

the baby-boom generation ages and the life expectancy of Americans

continues to lengthen. SSA’s disability caseloads are also expected to grow

rapidly and become increasingly complex in the future as baby boomers

reach their peak disability-prone years. For example, by 2010 SSA expects

demand for DI services to increase by 54 percent over 1999 levels.

However, even with its considerable workload, SSA is viewed as a leader

in federal service delivery. Additionally, the agency produces timely and

accurate financial statements and is considered a leader among

government agencies for its accountability reporting.

We have reported that SSA continues to face substantial management

challenges as it administers its programs. These include playing an active

research, evaluation, and policy development role; improving its disability

determination process and returning people to work; sustaining

management and oversight of long-standing, high-risk SSI issues; better

positioning itself for future service delivery challenges; and further

strengthening its controls to protect SSA information.8

 For example, we

reported that SSA’s disability determination process has long suffered

from a set of serious problems that make it time-consuming, expensive,

and complex. Ongoing challenges to making timely and accurate

determinations can result in beneficiaries waiting more than 1 year for

final disability decisions. Continuing inefficiencies also result in very few

beneficiaries leaving the rolls to return to work. Also, we designated the

SSI program high-risk in 1997 because of its susceptibility to waste, fraud,

abuse, and mismanagement. The SSI program continues to face many longstanding problems, such as program abuses and mismanagement,

substantial overpayments, and SSA’s inability to recover outstanding debt.

(See app. I for a detailed discussion of each of the management

challenges.)

 8

Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Social Security Administration

(GAO-01-261, Jan. 2001).
Page 7 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

This section discusses our analysis of SSA’s performance in achieving

selected key outcomes and the strategies the agency has in place,

particularly in terms of human capital and information technology, for

accomplishing these outcomes.9

 We have also provided information drawn

from our prior work on the extent to which the agency provided assurance

that the performance information it is reporting is credible.

Among federal agencies, SSA is considered a leader in service delivery.

The agency considers this one of its top priorities, and its current

performance report and plan generally convey SSA’s progress and

strategies for providing accurate, timely, and useful services to the public.

However, our review of SSA’s performance report and plan identified

continuing weaknesses that could hamper its ability to provide high-level

service delivery as future workloads increase. This was especially

problematic in regard to SSA’s goals and measures for its 800-number

services.

SSA’s fiscal year 2000 annual performance report showed that it met

approximately half of its 34 original and revised goals related to the key

agency outcome of providing timely, accurate, and useful information and

services to the public. For example, SSA met its original goals for key

indicators such as the percentage of earnings posted correctly and the

percentage of initial SSI aged claims processed within 14 days of filing. But

SSA also met several goals by lowering target performance, including the

volume of 800-number calls processed, and often cited insufficient

budgetary resources as the reason for revising this and other targets. In

addressing its unmet goals, SSA often cited methodological constraints in

measuring performance through its customer surveys, as well as higher

than expected workloads, as reasons for not attaining them. For seven

other goals, including a key measure of the accuracy of services obtained

via its 800-number, data were not yet available for us to assess

performance. SSA noted that these data were received late and were not

ready for inclusion in its fiscal year 2000 report.

 9

Key elements of modern human capital management include strategic human capital

planning and organizational alignment; leadership continuity and succession planning;

acquiring and developing staff whose number, skills, and deployment meet agency needs;

and creating results-oriented organizational cultures.

Assessment of SSA’s

Progress and

Strategies in

Accomplishing

Selected Key

Outcomes

Timely, Accurate, and

Useful Information and

Services to the Public
Page 8 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan increased the number of strategic objectives

and indicators related to this key outcome. For example, SSA added a

strategic objective to improve or maintain the accuracy, timeliness, and

efficiency of services it provides to benefit recipients. To accomplish its

objectives, SSA’s strategies include increasing the number of interactive

automated services for simple business transactions that do not require

interaction with an SSA representative, as well as training customer

service staff on ways to improve accuracy on a number of error-prone

issues. However, SSA changed and deleted several customer service

indicators essential to documenting progress and performance in this area.

For example, SSA merged two accuracy indicators without sufficient

justification—the dollar accuracy of OASI payment outlays and the dollar

accuracy of DI payments outlays. Aggregating and reporting on these

separate and distinct programs in a single indicator may affect SSA’s

ability to sufficiently monitor and manage payment accuracy and obscure

SSA’s actual performance in either program. SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan

does not include an indicator to assess customer satisfaction with the

clarity of the notices it sends to the public. In prior work and testimony we

have stated that SSA’s notices were difficult to understand, presented

information in illogical order, and required complex analyses to

reconstruct how SSA had made adjustments to benefit payments.

Accordingly, we recommended that SSA develop a measure to hold itself

accountable for the quality of its notices.10

Our current assessment of SSA’s progress and strategies for addressing

weaknesses in the disability determination process showed that significant

challenges remain. We have previously reported that SSA’s complex and

costly disability claims process has been plagued by long-standing

weaknesses resulting in lengthy processing times for claimants, many of

whom must wait more than a year for a final decision. These long waits

are due, in part, to complex and fragmented decision-making processes

with many layers of review.

SSA’s report showed that it revised more than half of its fiscal year 2000

goals for this outcome, and met fewer than half of those, including key

goals for hearings volume and processing times. It also did not meet its

 10Social Security Administration: Longstanding Problems in SSA’s Letters to the Public

Need to Be Fixed (GAO/HEHS-00-179, Sep. 26, 2000) and Social Security Administration:

Many Letters Difficult to Understand (GAO/T-HEHS-94-126, Mar. 22, 1994).

Timeliness and Accuracy

of Disability

Determinations
Page 9 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

goal for conducting periodic Continuing Disability Reviews (CDR) of a

recipient’s medical condition. Furthermore, SSA did not provide any

explanation as to why this goal was not met. In regard to goals related to

the accuracy of initial and appealed disability decisions, SSA was unable

to report on its performance because data were not available in time for

the fiscal year 2000 report.

SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan includes several additional performance

indicators and strategies to address concerns raised during our review of

its fiscal year 1999 report and fiscal year 2001 plan. We reported that none

of its performance indicators measured timeliness from the customer’s

perspective—that is, the total time it takes a customer to receive a final

decision, including decisions reached on appeal. SSA revised its strategic

objective to increase the number of disability customers who receive

services and payments on time. The new objective now contains

performance indicators on the percentage of initial disability claims

decisions issued within 120 days (the goal for this indicator is to be

developed) and to implement electronic processing of disability claims by

2005. SSA has also added an objective to improve the accuracy, timeliness,

and efficiency of its services to customers requesting hearings or appeals,

which contains a performance indicator on the percent of hearings

decisions issued within 180 days. Strategies in support of a more efficient

disability process include testing the use of greater decision authority for

disability examiners and implementing a Hearings Process Improvement

(HPI) initiative to reduce cycle times for appealed cases. HPI includes

additional training to shorten learning curves for newly promoted or hired

employees. Despite these improvements, SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan still

does not include an indicator that measures the entire cycle time from

initial determination through appeal, and thus does not fully assess the

agency’s timeliness of disability determinations from the customer’s

perspective. SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan also does not include a goal for

measuring the success of its efforts to achieve consistency between the

initial and appellate levels. SSA will need to carefully monitor its progress

in this difficult area.

Finally, we are concerned that SSA deleted two key output measures that

it had previously included in its performance plans—disability claims

pending and hearings claims pending. Our analysis showed that SSA

generally did not meet its fiscal year targets various times since fiscal year

1997—for disability claims pending (in 1999 and 1998) and hearings

pending (in 2000, 1999, and 1997). The deletion of measures for key

pending workloads has resulted in the loss of performance indicators for

assessing SSA’s progress in meeting its goals for timely disability decisions
Page 10 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

and providing world-class customer service. SSA provided no explanation

in its plan as to why these indicators were deleted.

Our prior reports and testimonies have shown that SSA has had only

limited success in helping recipients with disabilities return to the

workforce, despite numerous technological and medical advances that

have made such transitions possible.11 While SSA indicates progress has

been made in this area, significant challenges remain.

In fiscal year 2000, SSA reported that it had met nearly all of its original

performance goals in this area. However, these measures were mainly

output-oriented, and did not directly convey SSA’s progress toward

meeting the intended outcome. One key goal in this area—to increase the

number of SSI disabled beneficiaries aged 18 to 64 who are working but

still receiving benefits—was revised downward and was met. For another

goal—to increase the number of DI adult worker beneficiaries who begin a

trial work period—data to allow us to assess SSA’s performance were

unavailable. Finally, the fiscal year 2000 performance report stated that

SSA fully met its goal for developing a measure for DI beneficiaries who

return to work. However, SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report showed that the

indicator was developed but specific numeric goals for evaluating

performance were still pending.

In June 2000, we reported that many of SSA’s fiscal year 2001 performance

measures were not sufficiently results-oriented, making it difficult to track

progress. SSA’s fiscal year 2002 performance plan shows that SSA has

begun to incorporate more outcome-oriented performance indicators to

support their efforts in this area. Two new indicators, in particular, should

help SSA gauge progress: the percentage increase in the number of DI

beneficiaries whose benefits are suspended/terminated due to

employment, and the percentage increase in the number of disabled SSI

beneficiaries no longer receiving cash benefits. However, SSA has not yet

set specific performance targets nor explained when they will be

developed. Finally, SSA has not yet assigned measurable goals for several

of its research-oriented performance indicators, such as the preparation of

a research design to develop techniques for validating medical listings.

 11See reports including SSA Disability: Other Programs May Provide Lessons for

Improving Return-to-Work Efforts (GAO/T-HEHS-00-151, July 13, 2000) and SSA

Disability Redesign: Actions Needed to Enhance Future Progress (GAO/HEHS-99-25, Mar.

12, 1999).

Long-Term Disability

Benefits and Return-toWork
Page 11 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Despite its recent actions, SSA faces continued challenges in developing

baseline data to measure progress in the return-to-work area. We are

concerned about SSA’s plans related to this outcome because in prior

work we have noted that SSA’s data systems could not distinguish

between beneficiaries who no longer receive benefits due to medical

improvements and those who lose benefits because they are working. We

also remain concerned that SSA has yet to address our prior

recommendation that it develop a comprehensive return-to-work strategy

that focuses on identifying and enhancing beneficiaries’ work capacities.12

The absence of such a strategy and accompanying performance plan goals

may hinder SSA’s future efforts to make significant strides in the return-towork area.

In numerous reports and testimonies, we have reported that SSA has not

always been sufficiently active in research that would support policy

decision-making.13 However, in recent years SSA has taken actions to

strengthen its research and policy development role. SSA’s fiscal year 2000

performance report and fiscal year 2002 performance plan demonstrate

good progress in achieving this outcome.

SSA reported that it met nearly all of its fiscal year 2000 goals to provide

timely information to decision-makers necessary to address program

policy issues such as long-term trust fund solvency. Performance

indicators in this area included preparing numerous studies and analyses

to support key SSA program challenges. SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan

included reasonable strategies to achieve its goals, including partnering

with other federal agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human

Services, to coordinate program research directed toward mutual

populations. To help gauge the effectiveness of its research activities,

SSA’s current plan also includes indicators related to updating and

analyzing newly developed “barometer” measures, which indicate how

Social Security benefits, in combination with other related factors, affect

the economic well-being of the public. In accordance with our prior report

findings, SSA’s plan also contains revised customer-oriented indicators to

gauge satisfaction with the quality, accuracy, and timeliness of its research

 12SSA Disability: Return-to-Work Strategies From Other Systems May Improve Federal

Programs (GAO/HEHS-96-133, July 11, 1996), pp. 49-50.

13Our work is summarized in Social Security Administration: Effective Leadership

Needed to Meet Daunting Challenges (GAO/T-OGC-96-7, July 25, 1996), pp. 6-7.

Information for

Decisionmakers to

Address Program Policy

Issues Such as Long-Term

Trust Fund Solvency
Page 12 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

products. However, SSA’s future efforts to analyze policy options and

consider proposals for change may be hampered because it no longer has

an indicator in its fiscal year 2002 plan to maintain a Social Security and

SSI research and policy agenda. (This indicator last appeared in SSA’s

fiscal year 2000 plan and report.) These efforts merit attention given the

increasing number of proposals to reform the Social Security system and

the President’s creation of a Social Security commission to make

recommendations to modernize and restore fiscal soundness to Social

Security.

In 1997, we designated the SSI program high risk due to its susceptibility

to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, and because of SSA’s

difficulties in recovering outstanding SSI debt.14 Outstanding SSI debt and

newly detected overpayments for fiscal year 1999 totaled more than $3.8

billion. In recent years, SSA has taken numerous actions in coordination

with the Congress to strengthen SSI program integrity. However, our

review of SSA’s actual and planned performance found that sustained

attention is needed to ensure SSA’s progress toward meeting its SSI

program strategic goal.

SSA reported that it met the target goal for over half of its fiscal year 2000

performance indicators to reduce fraud, waste, and error in the SSI

program. SSA increased and met its targets for three performance goals in

this area, and attributed those increases to additional Office of Inspector

General (OIG) resources and higher-than-anticipated returns from

investigative and debt collection activities. SSA’s strategies related to this

key outcome include an initiative to prevent, detect, and resolve SSI

overpayments through improved automation of work processes and

targeting the most error-prone SSI policy areas. SSA also plans to combat

fraud through continued development and enhancement of debt recovery

tools. Despite SSA’s success in several areas, we are concerned that recent

revisions to SSA’s fiscal year 2002 objectives and indicators may negatively

affect SSA’s improvement in its stewardship of the SSI program. For

example, none of the components of a new debt-related indicator

measures debt actually collected. In fiscal year 2001 SSA had included a

strategic objective to increase SSI debt collections by 7 percent annually

through 2002. SSA’s fiscal year 2001 goal was $732.7 million. The newly

developed fiscal year 2002 objective states that, through 2005, SSA will

 14High-Risk Series: An Overview (GAO/HR-97-1, Feb. 1997), pp. 68, 70, 101-102.

Fraud, Waste, and Error in

the SSI Program
Page 13 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

maintain a level of outstanding debt that is in a “repayment agreement,

under appeal, or newly detected.” SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan states that

the goal for this indicator is to be developed, pending preparation of

baseline data, based on the three categories noted above. We are

concerned that none of the categories involves actual debt collected by

SSA in a given fiscal year. While SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan acknowledged

that its stewardship responsibilities require that it recover as much debt as

possible, it did not explain how the new indicator would help SSA better

monitor its debt collection activities. Our prior work has shown that a

significant amount of overpayments detected by SSA will likely never be

recovered. While SSA’s proposed measures have some value, eliminating

the goal of increasing annual SSI debt collections may be imprudent. This

is particularly true since SSA—in accordance with our prior

recommendations—pursued and obtained authority under the Foster Care

Independence Act of 1999 to use additional debt collection tools to

recover SSI overpayments.15 Since SSA has claimed that improved

overpayment recoveries would result from the act, it should maintain a

debt collection performance measure to gauge its progress in this area.

Also in regard to this key outcome, SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan shows that

the agency deleted without explanation a strategic objective “To position

the Agency’s resources and processes to meet emerging workloads.” (In

fiscal year 2000 SSA reported that the goals and indicators for this

objective were to be developed, but no goals and indicators were listed in

its fiscal year 2001 plan.) Finally, SSA also has not implemented the plan

improvements that we proposed last year, such as more clearly linking its

goals and measures for CDRs, investigations, and convictions to the SSI

program. Nor has it developed additional indicators of its antifraud efforts,

such as tracking the number of civil and monetary penalties levied. If

implemented, these improvements should further facilitate SSA’s efforts to

make progress in improving SSI program integrity. However, the current

plan makes no reference to SSA’s activities in these areas.

 15Supplemental Security Income: Action Needed on Long-Standing Problems Affecting

Program Integrity (GAO/HEHS-98-158, Sep. 14, 1998), p. 31.
Page 14 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

For the selected five key outcomes, this section describes major

improvements or remaining weaknesses in SSA’s fiscal year 2000

performance report in comparison with its fiscal year 1999 report, and

fiscal year 2002 performance plan in comparison with its fiscal year 2001

plan. It also discusses the degree to which the agency’s fiscal year 2000

report and fiscal year 2002 plan address concerns and recommendations

by the Congress, GAO, SSA’s OIG, and others.

Overall, SSA’s fiscal year 2000 performance report contains several

improvements over the 1999 report, but some weaknesses remain.

Improvements are primarily related to a clearer presentation of goal

attainment for its indicators. For example, the fiscal year 2000 report

provides additional graphics, headings, and markers to show the reader

whether targets were met, not met, or exceeded. However, future

performance reports would be more useful in tracking SSA’s progress on

key outcomes if trend data also included the prior years’ performance

goals, instead of just their actual performance. Also, SSA’s fiscal year 2000

report discussed our prior reviews of its performance plans and report, a

feature absent from its fiscal year 1999 report.16 However, there was no

reference to any specific actions taken by SSA in response to the identified

problems and deficiencies. SSA’s fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 1999

report were comparable in their discussion of actions taken by SSA’s OIG

in assuring the reliability of SSA’s measures and data systems. This section

in the fiscal year 2000 report identified several deficiencies and outlined

specific actions taken by SSA to address two OIG-identified deficiencies,

including measuring the accuracy of Social Security card processing and

the timeliness of earnings posted to beneficiaries’ records.

Despite these improvements, we identified weaknesses in SSA’s fiscal year

2000 performance report which cut across most of its five key outcomes

 16See Observations on the Social Security Administration’s Fiscal Year 2000

Performance Plan (GAO/HEHS-99-162R, July 30, 1999) and Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Fiscal Year 1999 Performance Report and Fiscal Year 2001

Performance Plan (GAO/HEHS-00-126R, June 30, 2000).

Comparison of SSA’s

Fiscal Year 2000

Performance Report

and Fiscal Year 2002

Performance Plan

With the Prior Year

Report and Plan for

Selected Key

Outcomes

Comparison of

Performance Reports for

Fiscal Years 1999 and 2000
Page 15 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

and include the practice of revising some goals,17 the need to continue

efforts to improve data credibility, and the unavailability of data for

certain goals that may hinder SSA’s ability to manage its performance.

Regarding the issue of data unavailability, in some instances we were

unable to determine—without revisiting SSA’s prior year’s plan and

report—whether SSA was regularly meeting its intended goals.18 This was

especially true for indicators for which performance data were not

available at the time of our prior years’ reviews. To illustrate, our current

review found that for a key indicator—accuracy of initial disability

determinations—SSA has reported performance data as being unavailable

at the time of publication for the last 2 years. Thus, our annual reviews and

reports have omitted a discussion of SSA’s progress toward attainment of

this goal. However, by examining performance data later included in SSA’s

annual performance plans, we found that SSA did not meet its

performance target for this goal in fiscal years 1998 and 1999. This

omission had the effect of disguising SSA’s actual performance over the

last 2 years and may hinder SSA’s attempts to assess future progress

toward attaining key outcomes. Also, we noted in our review of SSA’s 1999

report that SSA’s OIG noted that SSA has not verified the reliability of

most of its performance data. We also reported that SSA did not identify

the sources of performance data and generally did not discuss its

reliability and shortcomings. While SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report included

references to sources of performance data, it did not discuss its

methodologies for verifying performance data or any shortcomings in

these data, which may hinder SSA’s ability to measure progress toward the

five key outcomes.

Overall, SSA’s fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2002 plans are comparable in

their presentation of goals and objectives related to the five key outcomes.

Both years’ plans sufficiently discussed SSA’s budgetary resources related

to the strategic goals, external environmental factors influencing SSA’s

strategies, the means and strategies related to achieving performance

objectives, and definitions of goal indicators. In fiscal year 2002, SSA also

added baseline data, definitions, and data sources for its major budgeted

 17SSA revised 17 (about 25 percent) of the performance goals in its fiscal year 2000

performance report related to the five key outcomes; these revisions generally made

performance targets easier to meet.

18SSA was unable to provide data for 12 (about 18 percent) of the performance goals in its

fiscal year 2000 performance report related to the five key outcomes.

Comparison of

Performance Plans for

Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002
Page 16 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

workloads, such as Social Security number (SSN) requests processed. This

should help provide a basis for better tracking SSA’s progress in

processing these workloads. SSA also added an appendix that illustrates

planned program evaluations for its strategic goals, the lack of which we

cited as a deficiency in our prior work. Also in fiscal year 2002, SSA added

another appendix that depicts the fiscal year 1997 and fiscal year 2000

strategic plan objectives for each of its strategic goals. SSA officials stated

that this information is intended to convey the evolution of its strategic

objectives since 1997, the year of its first strategic plan. However, SSA

could improve the usefulness of this information for tracking progress if it

provided a full record of the revisions it made to its strategic objectives in

the years between 1997 and 2000. Currently, the changes between 1997

and 2000 are not depicted and it is difficult to determine the relationship

between SSA’s original and fiscal year 2000 objectives.

Regarding specific key outcomes, SSA’s enhancements over the prior

year’s plan largely pertained to the disability determination and return-towork key outcomes. For example, as we noted previously, SSA revised its

strategic objectives related to increasing the number of disability

customers who receive services and payments on time, and added a new

objective and supporting indicators to improve the accuracy, timeliness,

and efficiency of its services to customers. Regarding fraud, waste, and

error in the SSI program, in 2000 we reported that the agency’s

overpayment goals combine new and old debt and underpayments, which

may allow above-average performance in one area to mask lagging

performance in the other area. SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan continued use of

these same measures.

GAO has identified two governmentwide high-risk areas: strategic human

capital management and information security. Regarding human capital

issues at SSA, we have reported that demand for SSA’s services will grow

rapidly as the baby-boom generation ages and enters disability-prone

years. At the same time, SSA will be faced with significant workforce

challenges as more than half of its 63,000 employees become eligible for

retirement. We have noted that this convergence of events will require SSA

to plan more strategically and make prudent technology and workforce

investments to ensure a sufficient level of staff with the proper skills in the

SSA’s Efforts to Address Its

Major Management

Challenges Identified by

GAO
Page 17 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

future. We have also recommended that SSA develop a service delivery

plan to guide its efforts that incorporates the key elements noted above.19

In the area of information security, we have reported that SSA must

address weaknesses in its information systems internal controls to ensure

that automated agency data are both reliable and credible. Specifically, we

reported that such weaknesses have exposed SSA and its computer

systems to external and internal intrusion, thus subjecting automated data

to potential unauthorized access and modification.20

Our review showed that SSA’s performance plan has a strategic goal and

measures related to human capital management. It also discusses specific

recruitment, training, and staff development strategies SSA intends to

pursue to acquire the workforce it needs for the future. SSA reported that

its strategies in this area focus on better aligning how it manages human

capital with its newly revised strategic plan to help meet its longer-term

resource and workload challenges, as specified in its 2010 Service Vision.

For example, SSA’s initiatives include conducting leadership training and

career development programs that are based on competencies needed for

employees to perform well and developing an integrated automated

system to support its human resource workloads. However, many of SSA’s

performance goals in this area have yet to be developed, including specific

goals and measures for implementing its workforce transition plan to

guide future human capital decisions. With respect to information security,

SSA’s performance plan does not have specific goals and measures related

to this challenge, but discusses its current processes and strategies for

controlling and protecting information. These include improving security

awareness and training efforts, deploying new security technology,

introducing new performance measures for information systems security

to be reported to monitoring authorities, and taking actions to ensure that

its assets are protected from physical and cyber threats. However,

information infrastructure weaknesses persist, and SSA’s fiscal year 2002

plan does not include specific goals, indicators, or performance measures

related to this risk.

 19SSA Customer Service: Broad Service Delivery Plan Needed to Address Future

Challenges (GAO/T-HEHS/AIMD-00-75, Feb. 10, 2000), p. 1.

20Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Social Security Administration

(GAO-01-261, Jan. 2001).
Page 18 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

In addition to these governmentwide challenges, GAO has identified five

major management challenges facing SSA that generally encompass the

five key outcomes discussed in this report: playing an active research and

policy development role, improving the disability determination process

and returning people to work, sustaining management and oversight of the

high-risk SSI program, better positioning itself for future service delivery

challenges, and further strengthening controls to protect SSA information.

SSA’s performance report conveyed the agency’s progress in meeting four

of these challenges, but did not include specific goals and measures

related to strengthening controls to protect its information. However, SSA

discussed strategies related to this challenge. Additionally, for some

challenges—disability determinations, return-to-work, and SSI program

management and oversight—further actions and goals are needed.

Appendix I provides detailed information on how SSA addressed its

management challenges as well as those high-risk areas identified by SSA’s

OIG.

SSA faces many challenges, especially in regard to ensuring a sufficient

and skilled future workforce, improving SSI program integrity, and

addressing longstanding problems with its disability programs. The

agency’s strategic planning framework, which includes its recent annual

performance reports and plans, shows that SSA has generally taken

actions to address its most pressing challenges. However, weaknesses

remain and future strains on SSA’s programs, driven to a great extent by

the aging of the American population, require SSA to continuously

improve its planned and actual performance to ensure progress toward

achieving its key outcomes.

Specifically, we found that additional actions are needed to ensure that

SSA’s data systems and internal reporting structures support the provision

of program performance data in time for inclusion in its performance

reports. In fiscal year 2000, SSA was unable to provide data for

approximately 18 percent of its performance goals related to the five key

outcomes, which diminished our ability to gauge progress in several areas.

SSA also has not sufficiently addressed our existing concerns, as well as

the OIG’s, regarding the security and credibility of its performance data.

The absence of specific goals and measures to address these weaknesses

in SSA’s systems may compromise the future integrity of its performance

data. We are also concerned that SSA’s actions to revise a number of key

performance goals and measures—sometimes with little or no

justification—may impede its ultimate goal of improving program

performance. We are particularly concerned about the efficacy of SSA’s

Conclusions
Page 19 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

newly revised measures for DI and OASI program payment accuracy and

SSI debt collections. Finally, SSA’s deletion of key performance goals and

measures—such as disability claims and hearings pending—without a

sufficient rationale for doing so may further affect performance. We view

these goals as essential to assessing SSA’s success in managing its

disability determination process.

To further improve SSA’s future performance reports and plans, we

recommend that the Commissioner of Social Security take the following

actions:

• Ensure that all key performance data necessary to measure SSA’s progress

toward achieving its strategic goals are included in its annual performance

report.

• Develop specific goals and measures to address information security and

remaining information systems weaknesses that may affect the reliability

and credibility of SSA’s performance data.

• Include in SSA’s performance plan an explanation of the agency’s rationale

for revising and/or deleting prior performance goals and measures, as well

as a discussion of how new goals or measures will better support SSA’s

strategic goals.

On June 8, 2001, we obtained written comments on our draft report from

the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. The Acting Commissioner

generally agreed with our assessment of SSA’s progress in addressing its

key outcomes and major management challenges, as well as our

recommendations for further improving future performance reports and

plans. SSA also noted that, in response to our findings, specific measures

for disability claims pending and hearings pending would be included in

future performance plans. SSA’s comments are printed in appendix II.

SSA also provided technical comments on our draft report. SSA disagreed

with our assertion that the use of a combined OASI/DI nonmedical

payment accuracy measure would hinder its ability to monitor and manage

performance for both programs. We continue to believe that using a

combined payment accuracy measure for these separate and distinct

programs could ultimately mask problems in the DI program if they were

offset by increased efficiencies in the much larger OASI program. SSA

also took issue with our characterization of its lack of a comprehensive

return-to-work strategy for beneficiaries with disabilities. We recognize

Recommendations for

Executive Action

Agency Comments

and Our Response
Page 20 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

SSA’s activities in this area, such as implementing the Ticket to Work and

Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999. However, fundamental

weaknesses remain in SSA’s approach, including an eligibility assessment

process that encourages applicants to focus on their incapacities, and

return-to-work assistance that occurs only after an often-lengthy eligibility

process.21 We incorporated SSA’s other technical comments where

appropriate.

Our evaluation was generally based on the requirements of GPRA, the

Reports Consolidation Act of 2000, guidance to agencies from the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) for developing performance plans and

reports (OMB Circular A-11, Part 2), previous reports and evaluations by

us and others, our knowledge of SSA’s operations and programs, GAO’s

identification of best practices concerning performance planning and

reporting, and our observations on SSA’s other GPRA-related efforts. We

also discussed our review with officials from SSA’s Office of Strategic

Management and with its Office of Inspector General. The agency

outcomes that were used as the basis for our review were identified by the

Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Committee on Governmental

Affairs as important mission areas for the agency and generally reflect the

outcomes for all of SSA’s programs or activities. The major management

challenges confronting SSA, including the governmentwide high-risk areas

of strategic human capital management and information security, were

identified by GAO in our January 2001 performance and accountability

series and high-risk update, and were identified by SSA’s Office of

Inspector General in December 2000. We did not independently verify the

information contained in the performance report and plan, although we

did draw from other GAO work in assessing the validity, reliability, and

timeliness of SSA’s performance data. We conducted our review from

April 2000 through June 2000 in accordance with generally accepted

government auditing standards.

As arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents

earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days after the

date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies to appropriate

congressional committees; the Acting Commissioner of Social Security;

 21SSA Disability: Other Programs May Provide Lessons for Improving Return-to-Work

Efforts (GAO-01-153, Jan. 12, 2001).

Scope and

Methodology
Page 21 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. Copies will also be

made available to others upon request.

If you or your staff has any questions, please call me at (202) 512-7215. Key

contributors to this report are listed in appendix III.

Sincerely yours,

Barbara D. Bovbjerg

Director, Education, Workforce, and

 Income Security Issues
Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges

Page 22 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

The following table identifies the major management challenges

confronting the Social Security Administration (SSA), which include the

governmentwide high-risk areas of strategic human capital management

and information security. The first column describes the challenges that

we and/or SSA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) have identified. The

second column discusses SSA’s progress in resolving its challenges as

discussed in its fiscal year 2000 performance report. The third column

discusses the extent to which SSA’s fiscal year 2002 performance plan

includes performance goals and measures to address these challenges. We

found that SSA’s performance report discussed the agency’s progress in

resolving all of its challenges, with the exception of identity theft and

representative payees. Of the 11 major management challenges identified

by both us and the OIG, SSA’s performance plan had (1) goals and

measures that were directly related to five of the challenges; (2) goals and

measures that were indirectly applicable to two of the challenges, and (3)

no goals and measures related to four of the challenges, but discussed

strategies to address them.

Table 1: Major Management Challenges

Major management challenge

Progress in resolving major management

challenge as discussed in the fiscal year

2000 performance report

Applicable goals and measures in the

fiscal year 2002 performance plan

GAO-designated governmentwide high risk

Strategic Human Capital

Management: GAO has identified

shortcomings at multiple agencies

involving key elements of modern

strategic human capital

management, including strategic

human capital planning and

organizational alignment; leadership

continuity and succession planning;

acquiring and developing staffs

whose size, skills, and deployment

meet agency needs; and creating

results-oriented organizational

cultures.

SSA faces human capital

management challenges due to an

increasing demand for services, the

imminent retirement of a large

portion of its workforce, changing

customer expectations, and mixed

success in past technology

investments. These conditions

challenge SSA’s ability to meet

service delivery demands, such as

SSA’s progress related to the strategic human

capital management challenge is presented

under its strategic goal “to be an employer that

values and invests in each employee.” SSA

reported that the focus of this goal is to ensure

that SSA continues to have the highly skilled,

high-performing, and motivated workforce that is

critical to the achievement of its mission.

SSA’s human capital strategic goal contained

strategic objectives, which addressed

(1) providing workforce tools and training, such

as access to interactive video training and

management development programs; (2)

creating a physical environment that promotes

the health and well-being of employees; (3)

promoting an agency culture that successfully

incorporates SSA’s values; and (4) creating a

skilled workforce to serve SSA’s diverse

customers in the 21st century.

Of the 16 performance goals that SSA used to

measure its fiscal year 2000 performance in this

area, 10 were met, 4 were not, and data were

SSA’s 2002 performance plan contains

revisions to several of its human capital

strategic objectives, performance indicators,

and goals.

For example, SSA revised one of its

workforce-related strategic objectives to

specifically address the need “to recruit,

develop, and retain a well-qualified and

satisfied workforce to perform effectively in

a changing future environment.” In this

revision, SSA acknowledged a “retirement

wave” that will result in more than 3,000

employees per year leaving SSA between

2006 and 2012 and the growth in workloads

attributable to aging baby boomers. Two of

the three indicators listed under this

objective have goals that are yet to be

developed; SSA plans to develop initial

baseline information to set these goals.

Under the “valued employees” strategic

goal, SSA has not yet developed fiscal year

2002 goals for 5 of its 10 performance

indicators.

The fiscal year 2002 plan also contains

Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges
Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges

Page 23 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Major management challenge

Progress in resolving major management

challenge as discussed in the fiscal year

2000 performance report

Applicable goals and measures in the

fiscal year 2002 performance plan

faster and more accurate benefit

claims determinations and an

increased emphasis on returning

the disabled to work. The aging of

the baby-boom generation has

further heightened this challenge. In

prior work we have recommended

that SSA develop a more detailed

service delivery plan that would

provide a blueprint for assessing a

proper staff and skill mix for

operating in the future.

not available for 2. SSA did not meet a key goal

to implement competency-based models in the

recruitment and training areas.

information on SSA’s program evaluations

and key initiatives in support of its “values

and invests in each employee” strategic

goal. For example, in 2002 SSA estimates it

will complete program evaluation studies on

its organizational culture and

retirement/attrition patterns. Key SSA

initiatives include developing a workforce

transition plan, conducting leadership

training and career development programs,

and developing an integrated human

resources system to support various human

capital-related strategic objectives. The plan

also contains a table that shows its “values

and invests in each employee” strategic

goal supporting all three of SSA’s major

programs—Old Age and Survivor Insurance

(OASI), Disability Insurance (DI), and

Supplemental Security Income (SSI).

GAO-designated governmentwide high risk

Information Security: Our January

2001 high-risk update noted that

agencies’ and governmentwide

efforts to strengthen information

security have gained momentum

and expanded. Nevertheless,

recent audits continue to show that

federal computer systems are

riddled with weaknesses that make

them highly vulnerable to computerbased attacks and place a broad

range of critical operations at risk of

fraud, misuse, and disruption.

SSA needs to further strengthen its

controls to protect its information.

Weaknesses remaining in SSA’s

information systems’ internal

controls affect data reliability and

credibility. SSA’s systems

environment remains threatened by

security and integrity exposures

affecting key elements of its

systems and networks. These

exposures occurred due to

continuing weaknesses in several

components of SSA’s overall

information protection control

structure. These weaknesses have

exposed SSA and its computer

systems to external and internal

intrusion, thus subjecting automated

SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report did not contain any

specific performance indicators and goals

related to information security. Nonetheless,

references to information security were included

in sections of SSA’s performance report.

While SSA has made progress in addressing

information protection issues raised in prior

years, weaknesses in its security infrastructure

persist. For example, PricewaterhouseCoopers’

(PwC) fiscal year 2000 report on SSA’s

information systems noted that SSA made

significant progress to correct a fiscal year 1999

reportable condition that “SSA needs to

complete and fully test its plan for maintaining

continuity of operations.” However, PwC also

noted that weaknesses remain in SSA’s systems

and recommended that SSA further strengthen

its agency-wide security framework. Until this is

corrected, a weakened or incomplete information

protection control structure will continue to impair

SSA’s ability to mitigate the risk of unauthorized

access, modification, or disclosure of sensitive

SSA information. Areas where weaknesses

remained included (1) controls designed to limit

or detect access to computer programs, data,

and other computing resources at

nonheadquarters sites; (2) policies and rules

governing the operation of devices that control

external access to the SSA network; and (3) the

technical configuration of a contractor-controlled

area of SSA’s network.

SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan does not

contain any specific goals, objectives, and

performance indicators directly related to

information security. SSA’s discussion of

information security issues is primarily

included in the management challenge

section of SSA’s performance plan.

SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan states that SSA

remains committed to addressing security

and integrity issues with a goal to further

improve its overall information protection

control structure, and discusses several

activities in this area. These include

deploying new security technology,

integrating security into the business

process, and introducing new performance

measures for information systems security

to be reported to monitoring authorities.

Further, the agency has initiated several

steps to improve security awareness and

training efforts. SSA has also undertaken an

initiative intended to ensure its assets are

protected from physical and cyber threats.

SSA’s plan discusses the importance of

investing in new technology—including online electronic services—to meet customer

expectations, growing workloads, and its

long-range service vision. SSA’s plan also

includes performance indicators and goals
Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges

Page 24 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Major management challenge

Progress in resolving major management

challenge as discussed in the fiscal year

2000 performance report

Applicable goals and measures in the

fiscal year 2002 performance plan

data to potential unauthorized

access and modification.

(SSA’s OIG also identified this as a

management challenge under its

“Critical Information Infrastructure”

and “Systems Security and

Controls” designations.)

for increased on-line services. Our work has

shown that SSA has been cautious in

pursuing its on-line initiatives, largely

because of privacy and security concerns.

Because these services will potentially

involve exchanging data supplied by both

SSA and the customer, it is extremely

important for the agency to ensure that its

on-line applications are secure and to

protect the privacy of the public.

GAO-designated major management challenge

Play an Active Research,

Evaluation, and Policy Development

Role: As the nation’s expert on

Social Security issues, SSA is

uniquely positioned to assess the

programmatic impacts of economic

and demographic trends and

identify areas where policy changes

are needed to ensure that

recipients’ needs are met efficiently

and cost effectively. However, we

have testified and reported that

SSA has not always been

sufficiently active in using its

research, evaluation, and policy

components to identify areas where

legislative or other changes are

needed and to assist policymakers

in developing options for change.

Thus, SSA has missed

opportunities to provide information

to the Congress and others

essential to addressing crucial

policy issues.

SSA’s progress related to this challenge is

presented under its strategic goal, “to promote

valued, strong and responsive Social Security

programs and conduct effective policy

development, research, and program

evaluation.” This goal contains strategic

objectives such as providing information for

decisionmakers and others on Social Security

and SSI through objective and responsive

research, evaluation, and policy development.

SSA reported that it met nearly all of its fiscal

year 2000 goals for the key outcome of providing

timely information to decisionmakers necessary

to address program policy issues such as longterm trust fund solvency.

See our discussion in this report under the

key outcome to provide timely information

for decisionmakers to address program

policy changes for our assessment of

applicable SSA goals and measures.

SSA’s plans to address this challenge are

presented under the strategic goal “to

promote valued, strong and responsive

Social Security programs and conduct

effective policy development, research, and

program evaluation.” Overall, SSA’s actions

should help to enhance its ability to conduct

timely research, to provide information to

decisionmakers, and to develop options for

legislative change.

Also, the “management challenges” section

of SSA’s 2002 plan states that it plans to

play a critical, active role in the Social

Security reform policy debate by providing

information about overall program

characteristics and the implications of

proposed changes. SSA listed planned

outreach activities, such as holding

congressional briefings and conducting

analyses of Social Security reform

proposals.

GAO- and IG-designated major management challenge

Improve SSA’s Disability

Determination Process and Return

People to Work: Our prior work has

shown that SSA’s disability

determination process has long

suffered from a set of serious

problems. The process is timeconsuming, expensive, fragmented,

and complex. Ongoing weakness in

making timely and accurate

determinations result in

SSA’s progress related to this challenge is

presented under its customer service, policy

research, and program management strategic

goals.

Overall, SSA continued to have difficulties in its

disability determination process in fiscal year

2000. SSA reported that it met fewer than half of

its 10 performance goals related to making

disability determinations more timely and

accurate. Its report showed that data were

See our discussion in this report under the

key outcomes pertaining to disability

determinations and return-to-work for our

assessment of applicable SSA goals and

measures.

SSA’s plans to address this challenge are

included under its customer service, policy

research, and program management

strategic goals. For 2002, SSA revised its

strategic objective to increase the number of
Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges

Page 25 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Major management challenge

Progress in resolving major management

challenge as discussed in the fiscal year

2000 performance report

Applicable goals and measures in the

fiscal year 2002 performance plan

beneficiaries often waiting more

than 1 year for final disability

decisions. Continued inefficiency

results in very few beneficiaries

leaving the rolls to return to work.

The costs of administering the DI

and SSI programs reflect the

demanding nature of these

processes. In fiscal year 1999, SSA

spent almost $4.1 billion or 59

percent of its administrative budget

on these programs, while

beneficiaries of these programs

comprise less than 20 percent of

SSA’s total number of beneficiaries.

We have also reported on SSA’s

longstanding difficulties in providing

accurate and consistent decisions

about a claimant’s eligibility for

disability benefits.

(SSA’s OIG refers to this challenge

under its Disability Redesign

designation.)

unavailable for two indicators the accuracy of

Disability Determination Service and Office of

Hearings and Appeals decisions. SSA also did

not provide a reason for falling short of its goal

for Continuing Disability Reviews processed.

In fiscal year 2000, SSA improved its

performance for the key outcome to reduce longterm disability benefits because people return to

the workplace. SSA reported that it met nearly all

of its original goals in this area. However, most

of these goals were output-oriented and did not

directly support the key outcome.

disability customers who receive timely

services and payments.

However, SSA’s 2002 plan addresses

several—but not all—of the disability

determination measurement weaknesses

we identified in its past plans. The extent of

SSA’s progress will depend on its ability to

successfully implement supporting

technology, which has been challenging for

SSA in the past. SSA’s performance

indicators include installation of software

and infrastructure for electronic processing

of disability claims. The goals for these

indicators generally are not measurable,

however. Despite these improvements,

SSA’s plan still lacks an overall measure of

timeliness of the entire disability

determination process—which does not fully

assess timeliness from the customer’s

perspective.

Regarding the return-to-work area, SSA still

has progress to make. SSA’s plan contains

two new indicators which should help SSA

measure its long-term success in reducing

benefits because people return to work: (1)

the percent increase in the number of DI

beneficiaries whose benefits are

suspended/terminated due to substantial

gainful activity, and (2) the percent increase

in the number of SSI disabled beneficiaries

who no longer receive cash benefits due to

work. SSA’s plan did not contain

performance targets or explain the lack of

targets for these indicators.

GAO- and IG-designated major management challenge

Sustain Management and Oversight

of Long-Standing, High-Risk SSI

Issues: We designated the SSI

program high-risk in 1997 due to its

susceptibility to waste, fraud,

abuse, and mismanagement. The

SSI program continues to face

many long-standing problems, such

as program abuses and

mismanagement, substantial

overpayments, and SSA’s inability

to recover outstanding debt.

(SSA OIG’s “Fraud Risk”

SSA’s progress related to this challenge is

addressed under its strategic goal to make “SSA

program management the best-in-business, with

zero tolerance for fraud, waste, and abuse.”

SSA reported that it met its target goals for over

half of its indicators in this area in fiscal year

2000. SSA increased and met its targets for

three of four goals, and attributed its increased

production to additional OIG resources and

higher-than-anticipated return on investigative

and debt collection activities.

SSA’s fiscal year 2000 performance report is

See our discussion in this report under the

key outcome to reduce fraud, waste and

error in the SSI program for our assessment

of applicable SSA goals and measures.

SSA’s plans in this area are included under

its strategic goal “to ensure the integrity of

Social Security programs, with zero

tolerance for fraud and abuse.”

SSA’s plan reaffirms its commitment to

improve SSI program integrity and highlights

its key goals related to improving SSI

management. However, SSA’s 2002 plan
Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges

Page 26 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Major management challenge

Progress in resolving major management

challenge as discussed in the fiscal year

2000 performance report

Applicable goals and measures in the

fiscal year 2002 performance plan

designation addresses this issue.) incorporated in its accountability report for that

year. In the latter, SSA highlights management

improvement actions that SSA plans to take to

improve its oversight and stewardship of the SSI

program. SSA also stated that it implemented

actions to maintain its focus on improving the

accuracy of the SSI program, such as training

initiatives and the preparation of new procedures

to help strengthen SSI program management.

also deleted without explanation a strategic

objective to position the agency’s resources

and processes to meet emerging workloads.

GAO- and IG-designated major management challenge

Better Position SSA for Future

Service Delivery Challenges: SSA

faces significant challenges that

could hamper its ability to deliver

high-level service over the next

decade and beyond. SSA expects

to experience a significant increase

in the demand for services as the

baby-boom generation ages. In

addition, the imminent retirement of

a large portion of SSA’s own

workforce over the next decade and

changing customer expectations for

the types of services delivered will

further strain agency operations.

For example, over 80 percent of

SSA’s upper-level managers and

executives (GS-14, GS-15, and

Senior Executive Service level) will

be eligible to retire by 2010.

(SSA’s OIG refers to these

challenges under its “Service to the

Public” designation.)

SSA’s progress related to this challenge is

contained under its strategic goals “to deliver

customer-responsive, world-class service” and

“to strengthen public understanding of Social

Security programs.”

SSA reported that it met about half of its fiscal

year 2000 goals related to this area. For

example, SSA met its original goals for key

indicators such as the percentage of earnings

posted correctly and the percentage of initial SSI

aged claims processed within 14 days of filing.

For four other indicators, SSA met its revised

goals by lowering target performance (SSA

frequently cited insufficient budgetary resources

as the reason for its actions). For the 11 goals it

did not meet, SSA often cited measurement

constraints as well as high workloads as

reasons. For seven indicators, data were not yet

available for us to assess performance.

See our discussion in this report under the

key outcome to provide timely, accurate,

and useful information and services to the

public for our assessment of applicable SSA

goals and measures.

SSA’s plans to address this challenge are

included under its strategic goals “to deliver

customer-responsive, world-class service”

and “to strengthen public understanding of

the Social Security programs.”

SSA’s 2002 plan also includes several key

initiatives to better position the agency for

future service delivery challenges, such as

improving weaknesses in its 800-Number

service and obtaining feedback from

customers (SSA’s “Talking and Listening to

Customers” pilot project). However, the plan

does not contain specific indicators to

measure SSA’s progress in this important

area. SSA’s plan also notes that the agency

plans to rely upon investments in

information technology to attain its longrange service vision—for example, its 2010

Service Vision. SSA reported that it is

currently developing technology strategies

and process change plans to help improve

service delivery.
Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges

Page 27 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Major management challenge

Progress in resolving major management

challenge as discussed in the fiscal year

2000 performance report

Applicable goals and measures in the

fiscal year 2002 performance plan

GAO- and IG-designated major management challenge

Further Strengthen Controls to

Protect SSA Information: See

discussion under information

security governmentwide high-risk

area.

(SSA’s OIG also identified this as a

management challenge under its

“Critical Information Infrastructure”

and “Systems Security and

Controls” designations.)

See discussion under information security

governmentwide high-risk area.

See discussion under information security

governmentwide high-risk area.

OIG-designated major management challenge

Earnings Suspense File: The

Earnings Suspense File (ESF)

continues to grow each year. Since

the ESF consists mainly of wage

items that could not be matched to

individuals’ records, there is

concern about whether eligible

individuals will receive the full

amount due them in their retirement

years. Another concern is the

additional cost required to match

data to individual records. The ESF

is also indicative of a nationwide

problem of potential fraud and

misuse.

SSA’s progress in this area was reported under

its strategic goal to “make SSA program

management the best-in-business, with zero

tolerance for fraud and abuse.”

SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report indicates that SSA

made mixed progress on its performance

indicators related to the ESF in fiscal year 2000.

SSA did not meet its goal to post 98 percent of

wage items to individuals’ records by September

30 (it posted 97.6 percent), although it did meet

its goal of posting 99 percent of earnings

correctly.

SSA’s plans to address this issue are

included under its strategic goal “to ensure

the integrity of Social Security programs,

with zero tolerance for fraud and abuse.”

SSA’s 2002 plan contains several specific

numeric goals related to the ESF: to post 98

percent of wage items to individuals’ records

by September 30; to post 99 percent of

earnings correctly; and to have 30 percent

of employee reports (for example, W-2s)

filed electronically. SSA’s plan also contains

a specific initiative to reduce the size and

growth of the ESF.

In its plan, SSA reported that the OIG has

acknowledged improvements over the years

in the timeliness and accuracy of posting

wages to individuals’ records. However, the

OIG remains concerned about the volume of

wages posted to the ESF because SSA is

not able to match the report to valid names

and Social Security number (SSN).
Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges

Page 28 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Major management challenge

Progress in resolving major management

challenge as discussed in the fiscal year

2000 performance report

Applicable goals and measures in the

fiscal year 2002 performance plan

OIG-designated major management challenge

Enumeration: Enumeration is the

process of assigning SSNs to

workers and beneficiaries. It also

entails issuing replacement cards to

people with existing SSNs and

verifying SSNs for employers and

other federal agencies. The

importance of SSNs in today’s

society and the advances in

technology increase the risk of

fraudulent attempts to attain SSNs.

SSA must employ effective frontend controls in the enumeration

process to prevent fraud and

identity theft. OIG commends many

of SSA’s initiatives to address these

vulnerabilities. However, OIG

continues to believe further action

and review are necessary.

SSA’s progress in this area was reported under

its strategic goals “to provide timely, accurate,

and useful information and services to the

public” and “to make SSA program management

the best-in-business, with zero tolerance for

fraud and abuse.”

SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report noted that it met

two of its three performance indicators related to

enumeration. However, we were unable to

assess SSA’s accuracy indicator—to issue 99.8

percent of SSNs accurately—because data were

not yet available, according to SSA.

SSA’s plans to address this issue are

included in its strategic goal “to ensure the

integrity of Social Security programs, with

zero tolerance for fraud and abuse.”

SSA’s plan contains one performance

indicator and accompanying goal related to

enumeration—to issue 99.8 percent of

SSNs accurately. In SSA’s 2002 plan, this

indicator appears under a new SSA

customer service strategic objective namely,

to maintain the accuracy, timeliness, and

efficiency of services to customers applying

for SSNs and replacement cards through

2005.

OIG-designated major management challenge

Identity Theft: Over the years, the

SSN has been adopted for

numerous other purposes so that

today it is the single most widely

used identifier for federal and state

governments as well as the private

sector. The misuse of SSNs to

commit crimes is a fast-growing

area of concern, particularly in the

area of identity theft. SSA’s OIG

expects the number of allegations

through the Fraud Hotline to

continue to grow unless action is

taken to regulate the uses of SSNs.

SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report did not contain any

specific goals or measures in this area.

Therefore, we were unable to assess SSA’s

progress in addressing this management

challenge.

SSA’s 2002 plan does not contain any

specific goals or measures in this area.

However, the management challenges

section of SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan states

that its OIG credited SSA with recognizing

the need to reduce its vulnerability to

identity fraud. However, SSA reported that

the OIG stated these initiatives focused on

fraud detection, not fraud prevention. SSA’s

2002 plan indicates that its initiatives related

to the enumeration risk area (see above)

also applied to the identity theft risk.
Appendix I: Observations on the Social

Security Administration’s Efforts to Address

Its Major Management Challenges

Page 29 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Major management challenge

Progress in resolving major management

challenge as discussed in the fiscal year

2000 performance report

Applicable goals and measures in the

fiscal year 2002 performance plan

OIG-designated major management challenge

Representative Payees: SSA has

the authority to appoint

representative payees for

beneficiaries who are judged

incapable of managing or directing

the management of their benefits.

Due to the risk of representative

payees misusing the funds and the

vulnerability of beneficiaries, it is

imperative that SSA have

appropriate safeguards to ensure

representative payees meet their

responsibilities. OIG audits have

identified numerous weaknesses in

the selection, monitoring, and

accountability of representative

payees.

SSA’s fiscal year 2000 report did not specifically

address this challenge.

SSA’s report contained one indicator that is

indirectly related to this area—representative

payee actions processed. This indicator

appeared under its strategic goal “to make SSA

program management the best-in-business, with

zero tolerance for fraud and abuse.” The goal for

this indicator was to process 6,990,600 such

actions; in 2000 SSA reported that it processed

6,151,264. SSA acknowledged that it has little

control over the environmental factors affecting

these actions, and reported that it may need to

modify this measure.

SSA’s fiscal year 2002 plan contains one

indicator under its anti-fraud strategic goal—

representative payee actions processed—

which is indirectly related to this challenge.

SSA plans to process 6,882,000 such

actions in fiscal year 2002. Also, the plan

contains an initiative to make improvements

to the representative payment program

through various projects, such as, a custody

verification demonstration project for parent

payees and ongoing integrity reviews of the

program. Also, in fiscal years 2001 and

2002, SSA plans to conduct activities

including site visits and random reviews of

fee-for-service and volume payees and

developing additional beneficiary

educational materials.
Appendix II: Comments From the Social Security

Administration

Page 30 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Appendix II: Comments From the Social

Security Administration

Note: GAO’s comments

supplementing those in

the report text appear at

the end of this appendix.
Appendix II: Comments From the Social Security

Administration

Page 31 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Appendix II: Comments From the Social Security

Administration

Page 32 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

See comment 1.
Appendix II: Comments From the Social Security

Administration

Page 33 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes
Appendix II: Comments From the Social Security Administration

Page 34 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

The following is GAO’s comment on the Social Security Administration’s

letter dated June 8, 2001.

1. Our draft report does not state that separate OASI and DI payment

accuracy measures appear in SSA’s prior annual performance plan

(APP). Our concern is that the current plan includes a consolidated

measure of OASI/DI nonmedical payment accuracy, making it difficult

for SSA to monitor and manage performance in either program. Thus,

SSA should revise its GPRA reporting of these data.

GAO Comment
Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

Page 35 GAO-01-778 SSA's Status of Achieving Key Outcomes

Daniel Bertoni, (202) 512-5988

In addition to the contact named above, Shirley L. Abel, Michael A.

Alexander, Carol A. Langelier, Valerie C. Melvin, R. Elizabeth O’Toole, and

Anthony J. Wysocki made key contributions to this report.

Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff

Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Staff

Acknowledgments

(130037)

The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of reports are

$2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the

Superintendent of Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are also

accepted.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100

700 4th St., NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

Washington, DC 20013

Orders by phone:

(202) 512-6000

fax: (202) 512-6061

TDD (202) 512-2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To

receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days,

please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu will

provide information on how to obtain these lists.

Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send an email message with “info” in the body to:

Info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web home page at:

http://www.gao.gov

Contact one:

• Web site: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

• E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

• 1-800-424-5454 (automated answering system)

Ordering Information

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in

Federal Programs