OFFICE OF

THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

 

 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

 

 

 

FOLLOW-UP:  CONCURRENT TITLE II

AND XVI BENEFICIARIES

RECEIVING REPRESENTATIVE

PAYEE AND DIRECT PAYMENTS

 

August 2009                         A-09-09-19019

 

 

 

AUDIT REPORT

 

 

 

Mission

 

By conducting independent and objective audits, evaluations and investigations, we inspire public confidence in the integrity and security of SSA’s programs and operations and protect them against fraud, waste and abuse.  We provide timely, useful and reliable information and advice to Administration officials, Congress and the public.

 

Authority

 

The Inspector General Act created independent audit and investigative units, called the Office of Inspector General (OIG).  The mission of the OIG, as spelled out in the Act, is to:

 

     m    Conduct and supervise independent and objective audits and investigations relating to agency programs and operations.

     m    Promote economy, effectiveness, and efficiency within the agency.

     m    Prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse in agency programs and operations.

     m    Review and make recommendations regarding existing and proposed legislation and regulations relating to agency programs and operations.

     m    Keep the agency head and the Congress fully and currently informed of problems in agency programs and operations.

 

     To ensure objectivity, the IG Act empowers the IG with:

 

     m    Independence to determine what reviews to perform.

     m    Access to all information necessary for the reviews.

     m    Authority to publish findings and recommendations based on the reviews.

 

Vision

 

We strive for continual improvement in SSA’s programs, operations and management by proactively seeking new ways to prevent and deter fraud, waste and abuse.  We commit to integrity and excellence by supporting an environment that provides a valuable public service while encouraging employee development and retention and fostering diversity and innovation.

 


MEMORANDUM

 

Date:     August 20, 2009                                                                                Refer To:

 

To:       The Commissioner

 

From:     Inspector General

 

Subject: Follow-up:  Concurrent Title II and XVI Beneficiaries Receiving Representative Payee and Direct Payments (A-09-09-19019)

 

 

OBJECTIVE

 

Our objective was to determine whether the Social Security Administration (SSA) had improved its controls to prevent the direct payment of concurrent Title II[1] and XVI[2] benefits to individuals who had been appointed a representative payee.

 

BACKGROUND

 

SSA pays benefits under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act.  The Title II program provides benefits to retired and disabled workers, including their dependents and survivors.[3]  The Title XVI program provides payments to financially needy individuals who are aged, blind, or disabled.[4]

 

Some individuals cannot manage or direct the management of their finances because of their youth or mental or physical impairments.  Congress granted SSA the authority to appoint representative payees to receive and manage these beneficiaries’ payments.[5]  A representative payee may be an individual or an organization.  SSA selects representative payees for Title II and XVI beneficiaries when representative payments would serve the beneficiaries’ interests.  Representative payees are responsible for using benefits in the beneficiary’s best interests.[6]

 

Individuals who apply for Title XVI payments must apply for other program benefits, including Title II benefits.[7]  For Title II benefits, individuals must apply under their own Social Security number (SSN) and/or under another’s SSN to receive child or spousal benefits.[8]  SSA policy states that one representative payee is appointed for all benefits to which the beneficiary is entitled.[9] 

 

Our 2006 audit[10] found that SSA needed to improve its controls to prevent the direct payment of concurrent benefits to individuals who had been appointed a representative payee.  Specifically, we identified 11,399 concurrently entitled beneficiaries who received an estimated $166 million in direct payments while representative payees also received $175 million in payments on behalf of these beneficiaries.  Our prior report included several recommendations for corrective action.

 

In response to our prior recommendations, SSA completed a match between the Master Beneficiary (MBR) and Supplemental Security Records (SSR)[11] in June 2006 to identify concurrently entitled beneficiaries being paid directly and through a representative payee.  Additionally, SSA modified the Representative Payee System (RPS) to prevent the selection of different payees for concurrently entitled beneficiaries.

 

There are approximately 588,000 individuals with representative payees who are concurrently eligible for Title II and XVI benefits.  In October 2008, we conducted a match of SSA’s records and identified 9,276 concurrently entitled beneficiaries who were likely receiving their benefits directly and through a representative payee.

 

RESULTS OF REVIEW

 

SSA’s corrective actions had improved its controls to prevent the direct payment of concurrent benefits to individuals who had been appointed a representative payee.  Specifically, we found that SSA’s match of the MBR and SSR had reduced the number of individuals who had been receiving their benefits through conflicting payment methods.  In addition, SSA modified RPS to prevent the selection of different payees for concurrently entitled beneficiaries.  However, we found that SSA staff could bypass RPS and establish direct payments for concurrently entitled beneficiaries who had representative payees, and did not always resolve conflicting representative payment information for concurrently entitled beneficiaries.

 

Based on our review of a random sample of 200 concurrently entitled beneficiaries who were receiving their benefits directly and through representative payees, we estimate that about 7,931 beneficiaries received approximately $43.6 million in direct payments, and their representative payees received about $59.4 million on their behalf.  Further, if SSA does not determine whether the 7,931 concurrently entitled beneficiaries should be paid directly or through a representative payee, we estimate that approximately $56 million in additional benefit payments will be paid over the next 12 months.  This includes approximately $24.7 million that will be paid directly to beneficiaries (see Appendix C).

 

Concurrent Payments Made to Beneficiaries and Representative Payees

 

SSA policy[12] states that all adult beneficiaries are presumed competent to manage or direct someone else to manage their benefits unless there is evidence to the contrary.  If doubts arise regarding beneficiaries’ ability to manage or direct the management of their funds, SSA will determine their capability.  In addition, legally incompetent beneficiaries should be appointed a representative payee, as should children under age 18.[13]  When concurrently entitled beneficiaries are determined incapable, one representative payee should be appointed for both benefits.

 

Of the 200 concurrently entitled beneficiaries in our sample, we found that
171[14] (85 percent) were receiving 1 benefit directly and 1 through a representative payee.  The total amount paid to, and on behalf of, these beneficiaries was approximately $2.2 million.  Projecting our results to the population of 9,276 beneficiaries, we estimate SSA paid benefits totaling about $103 million to approximately 7,931 beneficiaries (see Appendix C).  The following chart includes the payments made to the beneficiaries and their representative payees.

 


Payments Made to Concurrently Entitled Beneficiaries 

Benefit Payments

Paid to Beneficiary

Paid to Representative Payee

Total Paid

Amount Paid

$941,004

$1,280,979

$2,221,983

Average Payment

$5,503

$7,491

$12,994

Estimate for Population

$43,643,779

$59,411,813

$103,055,592

 

Effectiveness of SSA’s MBR and SSR Match to Correct Payment Discrepancies

 

In response to our prior audit, SSA conducted a match between the MBR and SSR in June 2006.  The match identified 17,622 concurrently entitled beneficiaries being paid directly and through a representative payee.  In addition, SSA provided its employees instructions to resolve the discrepancies and determine whether the beneficiaries were capable of managing their benefits.

 

Based on our sample analysis from the population of 9,276 concurrently entitled beneficiaries, we concluded that SSA’s match was generally effective in identifying and resolving these cases.  Specifically, we found that only 18 (11 percent) of the 171 payment discrepancies were not identified or corrected by SSA’s June 2006 match.  However, 153 (89 percent) of the 171 payment discrepancies occurred after SSA’s match operation.  The following chart shows the number of beneficiaries with payment discrepancies who were not identified or corrected by SSA’s match and the number of new occurrences since SSA’s match.

 

Payment Discrepancies Before and After SSA Match

 

Description

Number of Beneficiaries

Percent of Beneficiaries

Payment Discrepancy Not Identified or Corrected by SSA’s Matching Operation

18

11

Payment Discrepancy Occurred After SSA’s Matching Operation

153

89

Total

171

100

 

For example, in one case, SSA appointed a representative payee to receive a beneficiary’s Title XVI payments.  In June 2000, the beneficiary became eligible for Title II benefits.  However, SSA did not appoint a representative payee to receive the Title II benefits.  Consequently, from June 2000 to December 2008, the beneficiary received $23,983 in direct payments, and the representative payee received $36,544 on the beneficiary’s behalf.

 


Representative Payee Information Not Entered in RPS

 

RPS was developed as a result of legislation[15] requiring that SSA more thoroughly investigate individuals applying to be representative payees and establish a centralized database of information about representative payees.  RPS contains data about representative payee applicants, beneficiaries in each representative payee’s care, and the relationship between the representative payees and the beneficiaries they serve.  It provides SSA employees with immediate access to vital information about representative payees, which assists them in making representative payee decisions.  In addition, SSA employees are required to document all entitlements to which a beneficiary is eligible in RPS.[16]  Finally, SSA policy states that one representative payee is appointed for all benefits to which a beneficiary is entitled.[17] 

 

In response to our prior report, SSA modified RPS to prevent the direct payment of concurrent benefits to individuals with representative payees.  However, if SSA staff does not enter necessary representative payee information in RPS, it will not prevent the direct payment from occurring.  Our review found that 88 of the 171 beneficiaries with payment discrepancies had no representative payee information in RPS for either the Title II or XVI entitlements.  In those instances, the representative payee information was only recorded in SSA’s payment records (that is, MBR or SSR).  As a result, RPS could not prevent the payment discrepancy from occurring.

 

For example, in March 2002, SSA appointed a representative payee to receive a beneficiary’s Title II benefits.  Information about the representative payee was recorded on the MBR and in RPS.  The beneficiary subsequently became entitled to Title XVI payments in March 2008.  At that time, SSA staff did not review the beneficiary’s MBR or RPS and therefore was not aware SSA had previously determined the beneficiary was incapable of managing his benefits.  Furthermore, since the beneficiary’s Title XVI entitlement was not entered into RPS, it did not prevent the direct payment of benefits to the beneficiary.  Consequently, from March to December 2008, the beneficiary received $3,813 in direct payments, and the representative payee received $4,618 on the beneficiary’s behalf.

 

Conflicting Representative Payee Information in SSA’s Records Was Not Resolved

 

We found that SSA had partially processed representative payee selections for 57 of the 171 beneficiaries with payment discrepancies in our sample.  In these cases, SSA had determined the 57 beneficiaries needed a representative payee; however, the selections were not finalized because of conflicting information in SSA’s systems.  For example, a selection could not be finalized because the type of payee (for example, mother, son, individual, organization) on the MBR or SSR did not agree with the type of payee information in RPS.  RPS maintains data on pending cases, and SSA staff is required to review RPS at least monthly to identify and resolve these cases.  However, we found that the 57 partially processed representative payee selections in our sample had been pending for an average of 14 months.

 

For example, a beneficiary entitled to Title II benefits since January 1988 became entitled to Title XVI payments in October 1988.  In September 2006, SSA appointed a representative payee to receive Title II benefits on the beneficiary’s behalf.  At the same time, SSA approved the representative payee for the Title XVI payments; however, RPS did not complete the payee appointment.  As a result, the beneficiary continued to receive Title XVI benefits directly.  Consequently, the beneficiary received direct payments of $2,466 while the representative payee received $6,702 from October 2006 through December 2008.

 

Impact of Concurrent Benefits Paid to Representative Payees and Beneficiaries

 

SSA is responsible for determining whether beneficiaries are capable of managing their own funds or directing someone else to manage their funds.  Making payments to representative payees for beneficiaries who are capable deprives the individuals of financial independence to determine how their benefits are spent.  Conversely, if SSA pays incapable beneficiaries directly, their basic needs (food, clothing and shelter) may not be met.  

 

Furthermore, when SSA is unaware of the conflicting payment methods, not all benefit payments, conserved funds, and other financial resources may be included in the annual Representative Payee Report.  Representative payees are required to provide SSA this Report to account for how they spent and conserved benefits.[18]  SSA requires a single Representative Payee Report to account for all benefits paid to concurrently entitled beneficiaries.[19]  SSA uses the Report to determine whether beneficiaries exceeded the resource limit[20] under the Title XVI program.

 


CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 

SSA’s corrective actions have resulted in improvement in its controls to prevent concurrent Title II and XVI beneficiaries from receiving representative payee and direct payments.  However, since SSA has not conducted additional matching operations, 153 (89 percent) of the 171 beneficiaries with payment discrepancies started receiving their benefits directly and through a representative payee after June 2006.

 

We recommend that SSA: 

 

1.      Conduct periodic matches and/or develop systems alerts to identify and correct instances in which concurrent payments are made directly to beneficiaries and representative payees.

 

2.      Remind SSA staff to use RPS when processing representative payee actions and to review the MBR/SSR to verify whether beneficiaries are concurrently entitled when making representative payee determinations.

 

AGENCY COMMENTS

 

SSA agreed with our recommendations.  The Agency’s comments are included in Appendix D.

 

 

 

/s/

                                                                                    Patrick P. O’Carroll, Jr.


Appendices

APPENDIX A – Acronyms

 

APPENDIX B – Scope and Methodology

 

APPENDIX C – Sampling Methodology and Results

 

APPENDIX D – Agency Comments

 

APPENDIX E – OIG Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

 

 

 


Appendix A

Acronyms

 

C.F.R.

Code of Federal Regulations

MBR

Master Beneficiary Record  

OIG

Office of the Inspector General

POMS

Program Operations Manual System 

RPS

Representative Payee System 

SSA

Social Security Administration 

SSN

Social Security Number

SSR

Supplemental Security Record 

Title II

The Old-Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance Program

Title XVI

The Supplemental Security Income Program

U.S.C.

United States Code

 

 

 


Appendix B

Scope and Methodology

 

We obtained an extract from the Master Beneficiary (MBR) and Supplemental Security Records (SSR) of concurrently entitled beneficiaries who were likely receiving both representative payee and direct payments.  We identified 9,276 concurrent beneficiaries who potentially had conflicting payment methods as of October 1, 2008.  From this population, we randomly selected a sample of 200 beneficiaries for review. 

 

To accomplish our objective, we

 

·        reviewed applicable Federal laws and regulations, as well as the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) Program Operations Manual System;

 

·        interviewed SSA staff from the Office of Income Security Programs; and

 

·        selected a random sample of 200 concurrent beneficiaries and obtained queries from SSA’s MBR, SSR, and Retirement Survivors and Disability Insurance Payment History, Treasury Check Information System, as well as the Representative Payee System.

 

We determined the computer-processed data from the MBR and SSR systems were sufficiently reliable for our intended use.  We conducted tests to determine the completeness and accuracy of the data.  These tests allowed us to assess the reliability of the data and achieve our audit objectives. 

 

We evaluated the adequacy of SSA’s controls to prevent the direct payment of concurrent benefits to individuals who had been appointed a representative payee.  Specifically, we determined whether the interface between the MBR and SSR identified situations in which benefit payments were paid both directly and to representative payees for concurrently entitled beneficiaries.  The amounts reported represent the total benefit payments made to and on behalf of the concurrent beneficiaries from May 2006 through December 2008.

 

We performed our audit work in Richmond, California, between December 2008 and March 2009.  The entity audited was SSA’s Office of Income Security Programs under the Deputy Commissioner for Retirement and Disability Policy.  We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.  We believe the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.


Appendix C

Sampling Methodology and Results

 

On October 1, 2008, we obtained a data extract from the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) Master Beneficiary and Supplemental Security Records of concurrent beneficiaries with potential conflicting payment methods.  The concurrent beneficiaries were in current pay status and were likely receiving both representative payee and direct payments.

 

We randomly selected 200 concurrently entitled beneficiaries for review.  For each sample item, we determined whether the conflicting payment methods existed and computed the amounts paid to, and on behalf of, the beneficiaries from May 2006 through December 2008.

 

Of the 200 concurrently entitled beneficiaries in our sample, we found that 171 beneficiaries received $941,004 in direct payments while representative payees received $1,280,979 on behalf of the beneficiaries.[21]

 

Projecting these results to our population of 9,276 concurrently entitled beneficiaries, we estimate SSA paid about 7,931 beneficiaries approximately $43.6 million in direct payments while their representative payees received about $59.4 million.  Further, if SSA does not resolve whether the 7,931 concurrent beneficiaries should be paid directly or through a representative payee, we estimate that additional benefit payments totaling approximately $56 million will be paid over the next 12 months.  This includes approximately $24.7 million that will be paid directly to beneficiaries.  These estimates are based on the monthly benefit paid to the 146 beneficiaries who were still receiving payments in December 2008.  The following tables provide the details of our sample results and statistical projections.

 

Table 1 – Population and Sample Size

 

Description

Number of Beneficiaries

Population Size

9,276

Sample Size

   200

 

 


Table 2 – Conflicting Payment Methods 

 

 

Description

Number of Beneficiaries

 

Direct Payments

Representative Payee

Sample Results

171

$941,004

$1,280,979

Point Estimate

7,931

$43,643,779

$59,411,813

  Lower Limit

7,496

$38,451,616

$50,549,546

  Upper Limit

8,291

$48,835,943

$68,274,080

Note:  All statistical projections are at the 90-percent confidence level.

 

 

Table 3 – 12-Month Estimate for Conflicting Payment Methods

 

Description

Direct Payments

Representative Payee Payments

 

Totals

Sample Results

$532,541

$675,696

$1,208,237

Point Estimate

     $24,699,259

$31,338,792

$56,038,051

  Lower Limit

$21,867,820

$27,878,796

 

  Upper Limit

$27,530,698

$34,798,787

 

Note:  All statistical projections are at the 90-percent confidence level.

 

 

 


Appendix D

Agency Comments


                

MEMORANDUM                                                                                                

 

 

Date:

July 30, 2009                                                                                  Refer

Refer To: S1J-3

                                                                                                                                                           

To:

Patrick P. O'Carroll, Jr.

Inspector General

 

From:

James A. Winn  /s/ Jo Tittel for

Chief of Staff

 

Subject:

Office of the Inspector General (OIG) Draft Report, “Follow-up:  Concurrent Title II and XVI Beneficiaries Receiving Representative Payee and Direct Payments” (A-09-09-19019)--INFORMATION

 

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft report.  We appreciate the comprehensive work the OIG auditing team did on this report.  Our response to the report findings and recommendations is attached.

 

Please let me know if we can be of further assistance.  Please direct staff inquiries to

Candace Skurnik, Director, Audit Management and Liaison Staff, at (410) 965-4636.

 

Attachment

 


COMMENTS ON THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL DRAFT REPORT, “FOLLOW-UP:  CONCURRENT TITLE II AND XVI BENEFICIARIES RECEIVING REPRESENTATIVE PAYEE AND DIRECT PAYMENTS” (A-09-09-19019)

 

Recommendation 1

 

Conduct periodic matches and/or develop systems alerts to identify and correct instances in which concurrent payments are made directly to beneficiaries and representative payees (rep payees).

 

Comment

 

We agree.  We will perform periodic matches to identify the problem cases and take the necessary corrective actions. 

 

Recommendation 2

 

Remind staff to use the Representative Payee System when processing rep payee actions and to review the Master Beneficiary Record/Supplemental Security Record to verify whether beneficiaries are concurrently entitled when making rep payee determinations.

 

Comment

 

We agree.  We will issue a reminder to staff of the appropriate procedures to follow when processing rep payee actions and making rep payee determinations. 

 

 


Appendix E

OIG Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

 

OIG Contacts

 

James J. Klein, Director, San Francisco Audit Division

 

Joseph I. Robleto, Audit Manager

 

Acknowledgments

 

In addition to those named above:

 

Timothy E. Meinholz, Senior Auditor

 

For additional copies of this report, please visit our web site at www.socialsecurity.gov/oig or contact the Office of the Inspector General’s Public Affairs Staff Assistant at (410) 965‑4518.  Refer to Common Identification Number A‑09‑09‑19019.

 

 

 


DISTRIBUTION SCHEDULE

Commissioner of Social Security                                                                                                  

Office of Management and Budget, Income Maintenance Branch                                             

Chairman and Ranking Member, Committee on Ways and Means                                          

Chief of Staff, Committee on Ways and Means                                                                           

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Social Security                          

Majority and Minority Staff Director, Subcommittee on Social Security                                    

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on the Budget, House of Representatives    

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform    

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives   

Chairman and Ranking Minority, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations,
   House of Representatives                                                                                                           

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate         

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate                                        

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Finance                                            

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Social Security Pensions and Family Policy 

Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Senate Special Committee on Aging                    

Social Security Advisory Board

     


Overview of the Office of the Inspector General

The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is comprised of an Office of Audit (OA), Office of Investigations (OI), Office of the Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG), Office of External Relations (OER), and Office of Technology and Resource Management (OTRM).  To ensure compliance with policies and procedures, internal controls, and professional standards, the OIG also has a comprehensive Professional Responsibility and Quality Assurance program.

Office of Audit

OA conducts financial and performance audits of the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) programs and operations and makes recommendations to ensure program objectives are achieved effectively and efficiently.  Financial audits assess whether SSA’s financial statements fairly present SSA’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flow.  Performance audits review the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of SSA’s programs and operations.  OA also conducts short-term management reviews and program evaluations on issues of concern to SSA, Congress, and the general public.

Office of Investigations

OI conducts investigations related to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement in SSA programs and operations.  This includes wrongdoing by applicants, beneficiaries, contractors, third parties, or SSA employees performing their official duties.  This office serves as liaison to the Department of Justice on all matters relating to the investigation of SSA programs and personnel.  OI also conducts joint investigations with other Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.

Office of the Counsel to the Inspector General

OCIG provides independent legal advice and counsel to the IG on various matters, including statutes, regulations, legislation, and policy directives.  OCIG also advises the IG on investigative procedures and techniques, as well as on legal implications and conclusions to be drawn from audit and investigative material.  Also, OCIG administers the Civil Monetary Penalty program.

Office of External Relations

OER manages OIG’s external and public affairs programs, and serves as the principal advisor on news releases and in providing information to the various news reporting services.  OER develops OIG’s media and public information policies, directs OIG’s external and public affairs programs, and serves as the primary contact for those seeking information about OIG.  OER prepares OIG publications, speeches, and presentations to internal and external organizations, and responds to Congressional correspondence. 

Office of Technology and Resource Management

OTRM supports OIG by providing information management and systems security.  OTRM also coordinates OIG’s budget, procurement, telecommunications, facilities, and human resources.  In addition, OTRM is the focal point for OIG’s strategic planning function, and the development and monitoring of performance measures.  In addition, OTRM receives and assigns for action allegations of criminal and administrative violations of Social Security laws, identifies fugitives receiving benefit payments from SSA, and provides technological assistance to investigations.



[1] The Old-Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance Program.

 

[2] The Supplemental Security Income Program.

 

[3] The Social Security Act, §§ 201-234, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-434.

 

[4] The Social Security Act, §§ 1601-1637, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1383f.

 

[5] We use the term “beneficiary” generically in this report to refer to both Title II beneficiaries and Title XVI recipients.

[6] The Social Security Act, §§ 205(j) and 1631(a)(2), 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(j) and 1383(a)(2); see also, 20 C.F.R. Parts 404, Subpart U, and 416, Subpart F.

 

[7] SSA, Program Operations Manual System (POMS), SI 00510.001.B.4.

 

[8] SSA, POMS, SI 00510.005.B.1.

 

[9] SSA, POMS, GN 00502.183.B.4.

 

[10] SSA OIG, Concurrent Title II and Title XVI Beneficiaries Receiving Representative Payee and Direct Payments (A-09-05-15144), April 2006.

 

[11] The MBR is an electronic file of all Title II beneficiaries.  The SSR is an electronic file of all Title XVI recipients.

[12] SSA, POMS, GN 00502.010.

 

[13] SSA, POMS, GN 00502.005.A and GN 00502.070.A.

 

[14] For 30 of our 200 sample cases, the MBR and SSR contained some conflicting representative payee information.  However, our review found that the information was corrected by SSA in a timely manner or did not result in a conflicting payment method.

[15] Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Public Law 101-508 § 5105; see also the Social Security Act §§ 205(j)(2) and 1631(a)(2)(B), 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(j)(2) and 1383(a)(2)(B).

 

[16] SSA, POMS, GN 00502.110 B.2.

 

[17] SSA, POMS, GN 00502.183.B.4.

[18] SSA, POMS, GN 00605.001 A. and B.1.

 

[19] SSA, POMS, GN 00605.001 A.

 

[20] Generally, Title XVI recipients cannot have over $2,000 in resources; a married beneficiary is limited to $3,000.  Recipients who exceed the resource limit are not eligible for Title XVI.  POMS, SI 01110.003, A.