Occupational Requirements Survey (ORS) Data Review 

Process

Ruth Meharenna1

1U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2 Massachusetts Ave., NE, Room 4160, 

Washington, DC 20212

Abstract

The Occupational Requirements Survey (ORS) is an establishment survey conducted by 

the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for the Social Security Administration (SSA). The 

survey collects information on the vocational preparation and the cognitive and physical 

requirements of occupations in the U.S. economy, as well as the environmental conditions 

in which those occupations are performed. This paper provides an overview of the ORS 

Review Program including information on the review processes, systems, and tools. The 

review process ensures that data are coded correctly and that documentation is sufficient. 

Review takes a variety of forms, such as edits in the computer system to catch erroneous 

data and edits that look for unusual data. One review process targets specific elements that 

an employer reports, while a second review process looks at all the data an employer 

provides. This paper discusses how all these review processes work together to ensure the 

quality and transparency of the data. 

Keywords: Review process, outliers, microdata review, data quality, data accuracy, edits

1. Introduction

In the summer of 2012, the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS) signed an interagency agreement, which has been updated annually, to 

begin the process of testing the collection of data on occupations. As a result, the 

Occupational Requirements Survey (ORS) was established as a test survey in late 2012. 

The goal of ORS is to collect and publish occupational information that will replace the 

outdated data currently used by SSA. More information on the background of ORS can be 

found in the next section. All ORS products will be made public for use by non-profits, 

employment agencies, state or federal agencies, the disability community, and other 

stakeholders.

An ORS interviewer attempts to collect close to 70 data elements (shown in appendix, 

table1) related to the occupational requirements of a job. The following four groups of 

information will be collected:

 Physical demand characteristics/factors of occupations (e.g., strength, hearing, or 

stooping)

 Specific vocational preparation requirements, which include educational requirements, 

experience, licensing and certification and post-employment training

 Mental and cognitive demands of work
 Environmental conditions in which the work is completed

Field testing to date has focused on developing procedures, protocols, collection aids, and 

microdata review processes using the National Compensation Survey (NCS) platform. It 

was from this field testing that a comprehensive review program was developed. The ORS 

Review Program encompasses varying review levels and requires active, constructive, and 

integrated roles on the part of field economists, regional office staff, and national office 

staff. It specifically includes both a quality assurance component and microdata review 

component for ensuring data accuracy. This paper presents an overview of the ORS Review 

Program. Section 2 provides background information on the Occupational Requirements 

Survey. Section 3 provides information on the ORS review program and review process, 

edits, tools and systems used by the National Office for the review of the ORS microdata. 

The paper ends with a summary and a description of additional review processes still being 

developed.

2. Background Information on ORS

In addition to providing Social Security benefits to retirees and survivors, the Social 

Security Administration (SSA) administers two large disability programs which provide 

benefit payments to millions of beneficiaries each year. Determinations for adult disability 

applicants are based on a five-step process that evaluates the capabilities of the worker, the 

requirements of their past work, and their ability to perform other work in the U.S. 

economy. In some cases, if an applicant is denied disability benefits, SSA policy requires 

adjudicators to document the decision by citing examples of jobs the claimant can still 

perform despite restrictions (such as limited ability to balance, stand, or carry objects) [1]. 

For over 50 years, the Social Security Administration has turned to the Department of 

Labor's Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) [2] as its primary source of occupational 

information to process the disability claims. SSA has incorporated many DOT conventions 

into their disability regulations. However, the DOT was last updated in its entirety in the 

late 1970’s, and a partial update was completed in 1991. Consequently, the SSA 

adjudicators who make the disability decisions must continue to refer to an increasingly 

outdated resource because it remains the most compatible with their statutory mandate and 

is the best source of data at this time.

When an applicant is denied SSA benefits, SSA must sometimes document the decision by 

citing examples of jobs that the claimant can still perform, despite their functional 

limitations. However, since the DOT has not been updated for so long, there are some jobs 

in the American economy that are not even represented in the DOT, and other jobs, in fact 

many often-cited jobs, no longer exist in large numbers in the American economy.

SSA has investigated numerous alternative data sources for the DOT such as adapting the 

Employment and Training Administration’s Occupational Information Network (O*NET) 

[3], using the BLS Occupational Employment Statistics program (OES) [4], and 

developing their own survey. But they were not successful with any of those potential data 

sources and turned to the National Compensation Survey program at the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics.
NCS is a national survey of business establishments conducted by the BLS [5]. Initial data 

from each sampled establishment are collected during a one year sample initiation period. 

Many collected data elements are then updated each quarter while other data elements are 

updated annually for at least three years. The data from the NCS are used to produce the 

Employer Cost Index (ECI), Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC), and 

various estimates about employer provided benefits. Additionally, data from the NCS are 

combined with data from the OES to produce statistics that are used to help in the Federal 

Pay Setting process. 

In order to produce these measures, the NCS collects information about the sampled 

business or governmental operation and about the occupations that are selected for detailed 

study. Each sample unit is classified using the North American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) [6]. Each job selected for study is classified using the Standard 

Occupational Classification system (SOC) [7]. In addition, each job is classified by work 

level – from entry level to expert, nonsupervisory employee to manager, etc. [8]. These 

distinctions are made by collecting information on the knowledge required to do the job, 

the job controls provided, the complexity of the tasks, the contacts made by the workers, 

and the physical environment where the work is performed. Many of these data elements 

are very similar to the types of data needed by SSA for the disability determination process.

All NCS data collection is performed by professional economists or statisticians, 

generically called field economists. Each field economist must have a college diploma and 

is required to complete a rigorous training and certification program before collecting data 

independently. As part of this training program, each field economist must complete 

several training exercises to ensure that collected data are coded the same way no matter 

which field economist collects the data. NCS uses processes like the field economist 

training to help ensure that the data collected in all sectors of the economy in all parts of 

the country are coded uniformly.

SSA asked the NCS to partner with them under an annual interagency reimbursable 

agreement to test the NCS ability to use the NCS infrastructure to collect data on 

occupational requirements.

If BLS is able to collect these data about work demands, SSA would have new and better 

data to use in its disability programs. SSA cited three key advantages of using NCS to 

provide this updated data:

 Reputation - SSA was impressed with the BLS reputation for producing high quality, 

statistically accurate data that are trusted by our data users and follow statistically 

accepted methods and principles.

 Trained Workforce – SSA was also impressed that NCS Field Economists have 

experience collecting information about occupations in America’s work force and 

collecting data similar to that needed by SSA. 

 Survey Infrastructure - After attempting to develop their own survey, SSA was also 

impressed with the fact that NCS has infrastructure in place across the country to 

manage and implement a new survey to meet their data needs as well as systems and 

processes to support all the steps of the survey.
Since 2012, NCS has been testing our ability to collect these new data elements using the 

NCS survey infrastructure. Field testing to date has focused on developing procedures, 

protocols, and collection aids using the NCS infrastructure. These testing phases were 

analyzed primarily using qualitative techniques but have shown that this survey is 

operationally feasible.

The pre-production test might better be described as a “dress rehearsal” as the collection 

procedures, data capture systems, and review processes were structured to be as close as 

possible to those that will be used in production. The sample design for the pre-production 

test was similar to that which will be used in production, but was altered to meet test goals. 

While the feasibility tests in FY 2014 and earlier were intended to gauge the viability of 

collecting occupational data elements and to test modes of collection and procedures, in 

FY 2015 BLS integrated the prior work into a large-scale nationally representative preproduction test. For more information on the pre-production test there is a BLS website 

[9].

3. ORS Review Program 

3.1 An Overview

The ORS Review Program ensures the accuracy, consistency, and integrity of the ORS 

microdata. It is a comprehensive program that serves several purposes including: problem 

identification and resolution, data correction and documentation, economist certification, 

data integrity verification, and development of future data expectations, review edits, and 

guidelines. Through the ORS Review Program, problems are identified, communicated in a 

variety of feedback loops to affected offices, and resolved once root causes are addressed. 

The resolution process includes problem identification, individual mentoring, group 

training, refinement of procedures, refinement of review edits, and systems development. It 

is this dedication to data accuracy and data quality that is the foundation on which accurate 

survey estimates are produced. 

The ORS Review Program includes varying review processes and is conducted by regional, 

quality assurance, and national office staff economists. 

3.1.1. Field Office Regional Processes

 Self-Review: Review completed by the individual data collector utilizing 

prompts, or edits, generated by the data capture system to identify potential data 

issues and possible data corrections. All edits or queries flagged by the data 

capture system must be verified prior to data submission.

 Mentor Review – Regional Observation Review (ROB): Experienced data 

collectors are paired with inexperienced data collectors as mentors and mentees. 

Review consists of observations of data collection interviews and review of all 

collected data as entered into the data capture system. Purposes of this review 

include skills development (i.e., conducting and collecting data through 

interviews) and providing a forum for analysis of data capture for accuracy and 

adherence to survey procedures as well as data collector certification. 
3.1.2. Field Office Quality Assurance Program

 Staff Development Analysis (SDA): All data elements are reviewed by quality 

assurance analysts using a question and answer review approach. Goals include 

data accuracy and corrections, continued staff development and support, and 

adherence to survey procedures. 

 Technical Re-Interview Program (TRP): Independent data review through 

respondent re-contact that includes a random selection of occupations and data 

elements to be reviewed. Review assesses the interaction between the data 

collector and the respondent as well as the accuracy of the data captured. This 

is the primary means for data integrity verification. 

Secondary review as described under the National Offices Processes is also 

completed as part of Mentor, Staff Development Analysis, and Technical ReInterview Program review.

3.1.3. National Office Processes

 Targeted Review: Combination review approach in which certainty data 

elements are reviewed for all occupations (i.e., quotes) in the collection unit 

(i.e., establishment) as well as randomly selected data elements for select 

quotes. The purpose of this review includes focused review of the more 

complicated and interrelated data elements and verification of microdata with 

estimation and publication impact.

 Secondary Review: In addition to queries (or edits) that have been included in 

the data capture system, additional queries (i.e., secondary edits) are run 

against all data elements outside the primary data capture system. These 

secondary edits explore the more complex relationships between the various 

data elements. It is this review that is also used to develop and analyze new 

edits before they are moved into the data capture system. An example of a 

secondary edit: “Coding for decision making exceeds what is expected for this 

SVP level”. Only data that fails a secondary edit is reviewed to determine 

whether further data collector clarification is needed.

 Cross-Establishment Review: Review of data by selected criteria, such as 

worker characteristics, industry, or area, across all establishments to identify 

outliers and unexpected outcomes, or trends and patterns in the data. This 

review is relatively new to the program and will continue to evolve as the ORS 

program evolves.

 Statistical Review: Review performed to determine whether further 

clarification(s) is needed from the data collector in order to calculate accurate 

sampling weights, as the weights have an impact on the estimation processes. 

This review focuses on a comparison of the establishment assigned for 

collection to the establishment actually collected, to ensure they are the same. 

When the two units differ, weight adjustments are implemented.
3.2 ORS Review Process

The ORS review program and processes evolved over multiple phases of testing,

collection, review, analysis, and evaluation. Early phases of collection and testing focused 

on how to collect the data. Initial edits were developed based on expectations and 

experience collecting similar surveys, and outside sources such as the O*NET. Collected 

data were reviewed for reasonableness and adherence to collection procedures. During 

each phase, and for each test, once all of the individual establishment data were collected 

and reviewed, they were analyzed to evaluate relationships within elements, between 

elements, and amongst related elements. Edits were refined based on analysis of the data, 

changes to procedures, and continued evaluation of the edit outcomes. If edits were rarely 

being flagged, or if they were flagging but not resulting in data being changed, they were 

re-evaluated to determine whether to keep or drop the edit, or modify the parameters that 

triggered the edit.

The review process also identified elements that data collectors appeared to be having 

difficulty coding, or complex relationships and concepts that data collectors may have had 

difficulty understanding. The findings were communicated back to the procedures and 

training groups who worked with SSA to refine the procedures and provide additional 

training and guidance. This cycle of training, collection, review, analysis, and evaluation 

continued through three phases of testing, six specific feasibility tests, and one PreProduction test.

3.2.1. Additional Review Tools and Approaches

In addition to the ORS processes, and edits being developed and refined, review tools were 

being developed, and continue to be developed, to assist reviewers. These tools include 

data visualization and cross-establishment review of data.

 Data visualization is displaying data in a manner that allows people to explore or

communicate the data efficiently. Good data visuals should enable anyone to see 

the big picture, easily compare values, and find patterns among the values; each of 

these should lead to a better understanding of the subject. The data visualization 

essentially turns thousands of rows of data into an interactive picture, graph, and 

dashboard where the reviewer can easily see all of the data at once. It provides 

context about the job being reviewed by showing other comparable data points and 

also provides some insight into the relationships between the elements.

 Cross-establishment review is the ability to look at data, or data elements, by 

specific criteria or combination of criteria, across all establishments; and helps the 

reviewer identify outliers, trends, or patterns in the data.

3.2.2. Integrating the Data Collection and Review Processes

An overview of the data collection and review process follows:

 Field economists collect data from the respondents.

 Data are coded in a data capture system. The data capture system has its own set 

of edits that a data collector must address before they can mark the establishment 

complete. Some of these edits are called Level 1 edits, which means the data must 

be changed before the establishment can be marked complete. This would include 
blank data fields or situations where coding is not valid such as, “Gross 

Manipulation hours coded is greater than work schedule hours per day”. Level 2 

edits can be addressed with documentation; and do not necessarily need to be 

changed.

 Field economists (FEs) conduct a self-review of the data and address all review 

edits generated by the data capture system. FEs provide supporting documentation 

if the data entered are correct but fail the edit, or they will note the data that were 

changed if there was an error identified by the edit. Documentation is used to 

explain unexpected data during various reviews and post-collection processing;

and to improve the edits for future collection efforts. 

 When the preceding steps have been accomplished, the establishment is marked 

complete.

 Establishments marked complete go through a Review Management Tool and

randomly get assigned to one of the following specific types of review. 

o Staff Development Analysis (SDA)

o Technical Re-Interview Program (TRP)

o Targeted

o Secondary

 Secondary edits are run outside of the data capture system, and are stored in an

ORS review and communication application. Secondary edits may explore some 

of the more complex relationships between elements; or may be edits that are being 

tested or implemented for the first time. They are created as secondary edits so that 

we can evaluate them and more easily modify them if necessary. Once they are 

refined, these edits may be moved into the data capture system. The secondary 

edits are used across all review types. 

As mentioned previously, mentor review is a regional review process where an experienced 

data collector observes the collection and data coding process of an inexperienced data 

collector, and reviews the data. These schedules receive full review, and therefore do not 

need to be assigned to additional review by the Review Management Tool. Statistical 

review is conducted by the mathematical statisticians working on ORS and occurs on all 

establishments in the survey in addition to any other assigned review; therefore, it also does 

not need to be assigned by the Review Management Tool. The chart below shows the 

typical review process and includes approximate percentages of the establishments that 

undergo each type of review. The establishments are assigned to a review type based on 

specific percentages determined prior to the collection start. Approximately fifteen percent 

(15%) of establishments are assigned to SDA, five percent (5%) to TRP, twenty percent 

(20%) to Targeted, and sixty percent (60%) to Secondary.
Once an establishment is marked complete, it will go through the secondary edits. Any data 

flagged by the edits must be addressed by the applicable reviewer. Flagged edits are

automatically loaded into the ORS review and communication application, where the 

reviewer will determine if the documentation adequately explains and supports the coding. 

If the documentation supports the coding, the reviewer will validate the flagged edit. If the 

documentation does not support the coding, the reviewer will send a question back to the 

data collector. 

The review and communications application serves multiple purposes. 

 It is a repository for all secondary edits flagged in review. 

 It allows a reviewer to enter adhoc questions to the data collector if the review is 

focusing on additional reviews of the data, or any specific data improvement 

projects where existing edits may not have been flagged.

 It is the primary means of communication between the reviewer and the data 

collector; and is a repository for all communication (questions and answers) 

surrounding review of the establishment.

 It allows for quick access to the data capture system, if the reviewer or data 

collector needs to review additional data or documentation from the establishment.

 Designation of review status. Once review is complete, the reviewer will mark the 

establishment complete.
The ORS Review Program includes multiple review processes, as indicated in the chart. 

Targeted, Secondary, Cross-establishment and Statistical reviews are done at the National 

office. Targeted review focuses on randomly selected data elements (an example is shown 

in appendix, table 2) and certain data elements that were challenging during previous 

testing phases and that impact estimates and publications. Secondary review focuses on 

more complex edits that deal with inter-relationship of data elements. Cross-establishment 

review focuses on outliers across establishments and elements. Statistical review analyzes 

data elements that can affect sample weights. 

This paper focuses on two of the review types: Targeted review and Secondary review. The 

goal of Targeted review and Secondary review, often known more generically as microdata

review, and conducted at the individual establishment level, is to ensure that the data in the 

establishment are correctly coded and that documentation is sufficient. Additionally, it is 

important that as microdata are reviewed, these data support ORS estimation and validation

processes, and ultimately the publication of accurate, consistent, high quality data. A total 

of 4,515 review questions were asked by reviewers during the pre-production test. Of the 

4,515 questions asked, 2740 resulted in data being changed. A total of 7667 secondary edits 

were validated by reviewers without further action required of the field economists.

 

3.3 Targeted Review

Targeted review is a combination review approach in which select data elements are 

reviewed for all occupations collected from the establishment (called “certainty” elements). 

In addition other randomly selected data elements are reviewed for select occupations. The 

purpose of this review includes focused review of the more complicated and interrelated 

data elements and verification of microdata with estimation and publication impact.

Once an establishment has been selected for Targeted review, the ORS review and 

communication application randomly chooses occupations and data elements to be 

reviewed. Additionally, the reviewer checks the following certainty elements for all quotes

 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) [6]: reviewers verify that the job 

description for all occupations (quotes) matches the definition in the SOC manual

 Specific Vocational Preparation (SVP): reviewer checks SVP coding and verifies 

that the documentation submitted supports coding

 Sit/Stand hours and coding: reviewers check the hours reported sitting and standing 

hours against the documentation submitted. They verify that the job is 

sitting/standing enough to perform other coded activities that require sitting or 

standing.

There are two element groups in Targeted review: Group A and Group B. The review and 

communications application also randomly selects one of the four sets of Group A elements 

and one of the five sets of Group B elements to be reviewed. Here are the steps in the 

selection process for a sampled establishment:

 Randomly selects 2 occupations from the establishment to review 

 Randomly selects 1 of the 4 sets of elements in Group A to review

 Randomly selects 1 of the 5 sets of elements in Group B to review
Below are the sets of data elements from each group that may be selected.

Group A Elements:

 Use of upper extremities: Reaching Overhead, Reaching at or below shoulder, 

Gross Manipulation, Fine Manipulation

 Use of lower extremities: Climbing stairs, Climbing ladders, Foot/leg controls, 

Crawling, Crouching, Stooping, Kneeling

 Strength: Lift/carry max ,Lift/carry, Push/pull - Hand/arm, Push/pull – Feet/leg,

 Keyboarding

 Knowledge/complexity: Cognitive (adaptability, pace, decision making, 

 supervision)

Group B Elements:

 Vision/ driving: Driving, Near, Far, Peripheral 

 Other senses: Communicating verbally, Noise intensity, Hearing (One on one, 

Group, Telephone, Other sounds, Pass hearing test), Cognitive (Work related 

personal interactions)

 Climate: Heat, Cold, Outdoors, Wetness

 Danger: High exposed places, Proximity to moving mechanical parts, Hazardous 

Contaminants

 Miscellaneous : Heavy vibrations, Leveling (Knowledge), Leveling (JCC) 

The targeted review edits are presented to the reviewer in the communication application

and the randomly selected data elements from Group A and B are displayed. The reviewer 

checks the data elements in the two groups that have been randomly selected. The reviewer 

verifies that coding and documentation match, checks if any activities are likely to require 

elements to be present concurrently and verifies that the amount of time coded accounts 

for this, and checks if any activities require elements that are mutually exclusive and 

verifies that the amount of time coded accounts for this. Reviewers send any needed 

clarifications to the data collector via the communication application.

In addition to completing the targeted review as described above, the analyst also reviews 

all secondary editsthat have flagged and verifies that data are explained. Secondary review, 

which is described next, is conducted concurrently with the targeted review of the 

establishment.

3.4 Secondary Review

The purpose of secondary review is to ensure that the data in the establishment are correctly 

coded and that documentation adequately explains and supports the coding. These 

secondary edits explore the more complex relationships between the various data elements. 
It is this review that is also used to develop and analyze new edits before they are moved 

into the data capture system.

In secondary review, only flagged secondary edits (an example is shown in appendix, table 

3) are reviewed to determine whether clarification is needed from a data collector. The 

reviewer can validate the flagged edits or ask questions of the data collector to resolve any 

unusual coding. Unusual data may already be addressed by documentation in the completed 

establishment, including documentation in response to data capture system edits. If the 

documentation is sufficient, the reviewer will validate the query in the communication 

application. The reviewer will also ask any other questions that are not sufficiently 

supported by the occupational description and general information. All the communication 

between FEs and Reviewers is done in the communication application. 

The reviewer investigates and resolves all secondary edits that have flagged to accomplish 

the following:

 Check assigned establishments for completeness

 Verify that the establishment and occupations (quotes) have both useful and 

relevant data inputs

 Check accuracy of coding

 Verify that data entered in the system are validated and documented

 Check whether any activities coded are likely to require that elements be present 

concurrently and verify that the amount of time coded accounts for this.

 Evaluate whether any activities coded require elements that are mutually exclusive 

and verify that the amount of time coded accounts for this.

The data review and communications application is the primary system used in secondary 

review, and reviewers use the data capture system to check for documentation. 

4. Summary

The ORS review program is a comprehensive review program. There are many review 

processes under one overall umbrella of review. Each review process has its own intended 

purposes and goals. The regions perform Mentor review as part of their training process, 

which includes observing collection and write-up of the collected data, by experienced 

staff. The Quality Technical Re-Interview Program (QTRP) team conducts the Technical 

Re-Interview Program (TRP), which is an independent data review through respondent recontact, and is a primary means for data integrity verification. The regions also perform 

Staff Development Analysis (SDA), which is a full data review with the goals of data 

accuracy and staff development. National Office review includes Targeted review, 

Secondary review, Statistical review, and Cross-Establishment review. Targeted review

focuses on the more complicated and interrelated data elements and verification of 

microdata with estimation and publication impact. Secondary review looks at secondary 

edits that explore the more complex relationships between the various data elements.

Statistical review determines if the sample related data are correct in order to calculate 

accurate sampling weights. Cross-Establishment review is a review of data by selected 

criteria, across all establishments, to identify outliers and unexpected outcomes, or trends 

and patterns in the data.
Many tools aid in the various review processes; one of the most significant tools is the 

edits. Edits have been developed since the very early phases of the Occupational 

Requirements Survey. They are continuously refined; new edits are created based on 

review findings and analysis of the data; ineffective edits are modified or deleted. 

Additional review tools have been developed for the ORS survey. Data visualization and 

cross-establishment review are examples of tools that are improving the review processes. 

These tools are in their beginning stages and look across workers by SOC, NAICS, worker 

characteristics etc., in order to provide better data for the ORS estimates. They have been 

tested and used in the Pre-Production test by staff performing Targeted and Secondary 

review. They will continue to be developed and improved, with the goal of expanding their 

use, not only in terms of the amount of data, but also expanded for use by the other review 

processes.

References

[1] Social Security Administration, Occupational Information System Project,

http://www.ssa.gov/disabilityresearch/occupational_info_systems.html

[2] U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (1991), 

“Dictionary of Occupational Titles, Fourth Edition, Revised 1991”

[3] U.S. Department of Labor, O*Net Online, http://www.onetonline.org/

[4] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008) BLS Handbook of Methods, Occupational 

 Employment Statistics, Chapter 3. http://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/pdf/homch3.pdf

[5] National Compensation Survey, NCS, http://www.bls.gov/ncs/

[6] See North American Industry Classification System 

http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/

[7] See Standard Occupational Classification website, http://www.bls.gov/soc/

[8] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Compensation Survey: Guide for 

Evaluating Your Firms’ Jobs and Pay, May 2013 (Revised), 

http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/sp/ncbr0004.pdf

[9] http://www.bls.gov/ors/#pretesting

Any opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not constitute policy 

of the Bureau of Labor Statistics or the Social Security Administration
Appendix - ORS Data Elements

Table 1 shows the list of ORS data elements. The communication application randomly 

chooses occupations (quotes) and data elements for targeted review. Table 2 shows an 

example of the 2 occupations (quotes) randomly selected as well as 1 of the 4 groups of 

data elements in Group A, and 1 of the 5 groups of data elements in Group B also randomly 

selected. Table 3 shows examples of secondary review edits.

Table 1: Data Elements

Exertion

Most weight lifted/Carried 

ever

Push/Pull with Feet Only: One 

or Both

Push/Pull with Foot/Leg: One or 

Both

Push/Pull with Hand/Arm: One 

or Both

Pushing/Pulling with Feet Only

Pushing/Pulling with Foot/Leg

Pushing/Pulling with Hand/Arm

Sitting

Sitting vs Standing at Will

Standing and Walking

Weight Lifted/Carried 2/3 of the 

time or more (range)

Weight Lifted/Carried 1/3 up to 

2/3 of the time (range)

Weight Lifted/Carried from 2% 

up to 1/3 of the time (range)

Weight Lifted/Carried up to 2% 

of the time (range)

Reaching/

Manipulation

Overhead Reaching

Overhead Reaching: One or 

Both

At/Below Shoulder Reaching

At/Below Shoulder Reaching: 

One or Both

Fine Manipulation

Fine Manipulation: One Hand or 

Both

Gross Manipulation

Gross Manipulation: One Hand 

or Both

Foot/Leg Controls

Foot/Leg Controls: One or Both

Keyboarding: 10-key

Keyboarding: Other

Keyboarding: Touch Screen

Keyboarding: Traditional

Postural

Climbing 

Ladders/Ropes/S

caffolds

Climbing 

Ramps/Stairs: 

structural only

Climbing 

Ramps/Stairs: 

work-related

Crawling

Crouching

Kneeling

Stooping

Occupational 

information

Standard occupation 

code

Occupation 

Employment

Full Time/Part Time

Union/Non-union

Time or Incentive 

wage structure

Worker Type 

(Supervisor, Lead, 

Non-Supervisory)

Occupation 

Knowledge level

Occupation Job 

Controls and 

Complexity level

Occupation Contacts 

level

Occupation Physical 

Environment level

Primary Job Tasks
Table 2: Example of Targeted Review Edits

Table 3: Example of Secondary Review Edits

Quote

4

3

5

Edit description

Lifting and Carrying is coded 

at a high level but gross 

manipulation is one hand only

Driving is coded but Foot/ 

Leg controls are not present

Coding for decision making 

exceeds what is expected for 

this SVP level

Randomly 

selected quotes

Quote 1

Quote 1

Randomly 

selected data 

elements

Use of lower 

extremities: Climbing 

stairs, Climbing 

ladders, Foot/leg 

controls, Crawling, 

Crouching, Stooping, 

Kneeling

Climate: Heat, Cold, 

Outdoors, Wetness

Randomly 

selected quotes

Quote 2

Quote 2

Randomly 

selected data 

elements

Use of lower 

extremities: Climbing 

stairs, Climbing 

ladders, Foot/leg 

controls, Crawling, 

Crouching, Stooping, 

Kneeling

Climate: Heat, Cold, 

Outdoors, Wetness