Opinion ID: 3020650
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Claimant’s IQ Test Scores

Text: Claimant scored a verbal IQ of 64, a performance IQ of 72, and a full scale IQ of 65. Although two of claimant’s scores placed her within the requisite level of Listing 112.05D, the ALJ discredited the claimant’s verbal and full scale IQ scores because these scores were at variance with the remainder of the evidence, including the report submitted by claimant’s teacher, the fact that claimant was in her age-appropriate grade, and Dr. Hernandez’s description of claimant’s intelligence as “average.” The IQ scores were further explained by Dr. Fernandez, the administrator of the test, who stated that social and cultural factors may have contributed to the low test scores and that the performance 7 IQ score would provide a better indication of claimant’s true intellectual abilities. We agree with the District Court that the ALJ’s finding regarding claimant’s IQ scores is supported by substantial evidence. In discrediting claimant’s verbal and full scale IQ scores, the ALJ also explained that there was no evidence of what type of IQ test was administered and whether it was standardized. Cacere argues that the ALJ should have ordered a second IQ test in light of these concerns, but, after mentioning that he would consider ordering a second test, he did not do so. Based on those facts, we do not rely on the ALJ’s unsupported statement regarding the type and standardization of the IQ test administered by Dr. Fernandez in concluding that ALJ’s finding is supported by substantial evidence.