Just Ask Jennifer: CLE in SLC

Jennifer Cronenberg, Interim CEO

I dropped my daughter off at sleepaway camp this week. It’s a very strange thing to leave one of the most important pieces of your life in someone else’s hands. There’s an immense amount of trust required for the whole process to work. I’m trusting the counselors not only to protect her, but also to help guide her through the process, using their knowledge and skills to ensure she has a successful experience.

It strikes me that it’s not dissimilar from the trust our clients put in us. They come to us with important pieces of their lives exposed, asking us not only to protect those pieces, but also to use our knowledge and skills to help them navigate a complex and daunting system. It’s not a small task. But that’s where NOSSCR comes in. We’re here to help you build and strengthen the skills you need to survive and succeed in this often-daunting field.

The slate of CLE courses that we have planned for SLC is intended to do just that. There are several different paths you can take during our conference. If you’re newer or your skills need freshening up, Tuesday offers the chance to take a primer on the entire process, followed by courses that guide you through every step, from intake through hearing prep. If the chaotic world of VE cross is your thing, Tuesday also offers the chance to hear from two different vocational experts on how they use the ORS, followed by practice tips on how to properly cross VEs from a panel of experts.

If you’ve always wondered how to properly handle a child’s claim, Wednesday is your moment, with an introduction to children’s disability cases, followed by a session on what to do to help those kids as they transition to adulthood.

On Thursday we have a series of courses that highlight the medical aspect of our cases – from the ethics of working with mentally impaired claimants, to understanding how to best use medical opinions in a post-2017 world, this track has something for everyone. And if you’ve been hoping to build the business side of your practice, Thursday also offers multiple sessions on business development, including how to avoid a reduction in fees, how to use AI to strengthen your practice, and how best to manage deadlines.

And please don’t forget our impressive slate of Friday sessions – this is your chance to get a comprehensive update on what has happened in the federal courts in 2026, and to hone your appellate skills – both at the AC and in federal court.

But that’s not all! The above description only covers a few of the 32 CLE hours that will be available during our conference. AND, CLE courses aren’t the only sessions we plan to offer in SLC. In addition to workshops and support-staff-specific trainings to be announced soon, we’re starting a new series called Table Talks during the breakfast hour. These loosely guided roundtables will be your chance to really hone your skills through hands-on activities while interacting with your peers. We’ve heard from many of you that these interactive peer-to-peer moments often offer some of the most lasting takeaways from our conferences, so it’s our goal to provide you with as many opportunities to interact as possible. We truly believe that, as a membership organization, our best resource is one another. And if you want to really get to know one another, be sure to check out Wednesday night’s talent show (more on that later).

In a few hours, I’ll leave to pick my daughter up from camp. Like all of you after our conferences, she’ll need sleep and will have piles of laundry that need doing. But she’ll also know new songs and games that she can share with her friends at home. She’ll have gained leadership skills and likely some patience and understanding along the way. It’s my hope for her, and all of you, that the lessons learned during the week away will have real value in the year ahead. So please, take a moment and register now for our fall conference. Much like summer camp, the week promises games, singing, growth, and probably that one weird guy who you hope doesn’t get the bunk next to yours (the good news is, the impeccable Grand America Hotel doesn’t have any bunks to offer, so you’re probably safe on that last one).

Save the Date! Remaining Virtual Circuit Meetings

It’s been a great treat getting to see so many of your faces during the latest round of circuit meetings. We love checking in with our members and hearing what’s going on in your region. If you haven’t had your meeting yet, be sure to mark your calendars and register to join us for your upcoming circuit meeting! During your meeting, you can expect to check in with your board representative(s), get updates on the latest happenings in your circuit, hear what’s new at NOSSCR, and receive important updates about Social Security.

First Circuit: 8/3, 3pm Eastern, Register here

Seventh Circuit: 8/5, 4pm Eastern, Register here

Ninth Circuit: 8/4, 3pm Eastern, Register here

Tenth Circuit: 8/5, 3pm Eastern, Register here

Eleventh Circuit: 8/6, 3pm Eastern, Register here

Dispatches from Camp: ABLE and Trump Accounts

David Camp, NOSSCR Senior Policy Advisor

A One-Year Window Your Clients’ Families Cannot Afford to Miss: Trump Accounts, ABLE, and Age 17

This month I want to put something on your radar that isn’t about pending legislation—primarily because it isn’t in pending legislation. This is a gap that may need to be filled by your counsel to some of your clients with disabled minor children—those who decide to use the new Trump Accounts.

The federal government has just launched a massive new savings program for children. While it is a benefit for most families, it contains a hidden structural trap for children with disabilities. If we do not act as the early warning system for our clients, a program designed to build their savings could instead disqualify them from SSI just as they reach adulthood.

Trump Accounts

Congress created “Trump Accounts” in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last July, and as of this summer they are officially live. The Treasury Department reports millions of children are already enrolled, with a one-time $1,000 federal pilot contribution rolling out for eligible U.S. citizens born between 2025 and 2028.

Mechanically, a Trump Account is a starter traditional IRA (Individual Retirement Account) for a child under Section 530A of the Internal Revenue Code. Family members and others can contribute up to $5,000 per year (indexed), employers can add up to $2,500 per year, and the money grows in low-fee index funds until the child reaches adulthood. The Treasury has designated Bank of New York Mellon as the financial agent, with Robinhood serving as the initial trustee. Parents make the election on IRS Form 4547 or online.

Collision with SSI

Here is why this belongs in a column for Social Security representatives: on January 1 of the year the child turns 18, a Trump Account automatically converts into an ordinary traditional IRA. For a child without a disability, that is exactly the point—a head start on retirement savings. For a child with a disability, it is a sudden SSI resources problem.

An IRA is a countable resource for SSI purposes, and it becomes countable at almost exactly the moment parental deeming ends and Social Security conducts the age-18 redetermination. A Trump Account holding even a modest few thousand dollars can push a young adult over the $2,000 SSI resource limit right as their own eligibility is being decided.

(This archaic cap is exactly why NOSSCR has endorsed the SSI Restoration Act. If passed, it would update asset limits by raising resource caps to $10,000 for individuals, finally moving past limits that have trapped beneficiaries in poverty. But until a statutory edit provides a way forward, we must navigate the rules as they exist today.)

Families who did the responsible thing by saving could watch those very savings disqualify their child.

The ABLE Escape Hatch: One Year, All or Nothing

Fortunately, Congress built in an off-ramp, though it is exceedingly narrow. Under Section 530A, the entire balance of a Trump Account may be rolled over into an ABLE (Achieving a Better Life Experience) account for the same child.

• The Age 17 Window: The transfer is only permitted by direct trustee-to-trustee transfer during the calendar year in which the child turns 17.
• All or Nothing: It must be the whole balance, in a single transfer. There is no partial rollover, no second chance at 18, and no grace period.
• Favorable Terms: The rollover is excluded from the child’s gross income and does not count against the ABLE annual contribution limit.
• SSI Protection: Once inside the ABLE account, the first $100,000 is excluded from SSI’s resource calculation, and the balance is disregarded entirely for Medicaid eligibility.

Note for the estate planners among you: ABLE accounts carry a Medicaid payback provision at the beneficiary’s death.

NOSSCR Advocacy

As of today, no entity is responsible for telling families about the age-17 window. The IRS administers Trump Accounts and does not know which children are disabled. The SSA knows exactly which children receive SSI and will be facing an age-18 redetermination, but they lack visibility into who holds a tax-advantaged account and have no current mandate to mention the rollover. The account trustee holds the money but has no obligation to flag the ABLE option.

The family in the middle is expected to connect a provision of the tax code to a provision of the Social Security Act on their own, in a specific twelve-month window, with no notice.

NOSSCR is working collaboratively with policymakers to find a common-sense solution—such as an automated advisory notice sent to the childhood SSI cohort as they approach age 17.

But until the system catches up, trusted representatives are a possible notice mechanism. If you represent families with disabled children, or your client is a parent whose child receives SSI, add one simple question to your intake and age-18 redetermination preparation: “Does this child have a Trump Account?”

If the answer is yes and the child is approaching 17, advise the family to contact their ABLE program and the account trustee about executing the rollover during the correct calendar year. Five minutes of issue-spotting can preserve a lifeline of SSI and Medicaid eligibility for your clients.

Got Talent? Sign Up for the Inaugural NOSSCR Talent Show!

Are you really into close-up magic? Maybe you’re secretly a trained tap dancer. Do you often rock karaoke and wish all of your colleagues knew how good you actually are? Well have we got some news for you!

Introducing the Scully Reception and Talent Show! With Tom Scully’s generous blessing, and the ongoing encouragement of Board member (and promised talent-show participant) Sarah Bohr, we are excited to bring you a new format for our post-General Session party. Instead of a ticketed dinner, we’re hosting a reception that’s open to all of our conference attendees, with entertainment provided by YOU!

If this seems like the moment you’ve been waiting for, sign up to perform today! Selected acts will take the stage on Wednesday, October 14, immediately following the General Session. Doors to the exhibitor space open at 5:00 PM for food and drinks, and the show kicks off shortly thereafter.

Whether you sing, juggle, do stand-up, or play an instrument, we want to see it! We’ll have a dance floor, piano, and sound system available for all of your performance needs (and if there’s something else you need, just let us know—we might be able to make some magic happen). This is a competitive event, and one lucky act will walk away with our new annual grand prize trophy. We’ll also be giving away exhibitor passport prizes throughout the night, so be sure you’re mixing and mingling with our generous exhibitors.

The Details:

• Deadline to apply to perform: September 4, 2026
• Eligibility: You must be a registered conference attendee to perform
• Content Rules: Keep it professional! All acts must be PG-rated and family-friendly

Available performance slots are limited to keep the show at 90 minutes. Selected entrants will be informed in early September.  

Listing Equivalency Win in 11th Circuit Migraine Case (Wright v. Comm’r)

Sarah H. Bohr, Eleventh Circuit Representative, Past President

Following oral argument, the Eleventh Circuit recently reversed and remanded in Wright v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 24-11084, 2026 WL 1481204, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 15080 (11th Cir. May 27, 2026), a migraine headache case, holding that the ALJ “failed to properly consider [Appellant’s] migraine headaches at step three of the sequential disability evaluation process by not addressing whether they medically equaled epilepsy under Listing 11.02(B) and Social Security Ruling (‘SSR’) 19-4p.”

The case was remanded, despite the lack of a medical source opinion addressing migraine headaches or medical equivalency because the treating neurologist’s treatment notes documented the SSR 19-4p factors, including the frequency, duration, and severity of migraine headaches, with a detailed description of Appellant’s typical migraine events. The reasoning of the court is useful to practitioners who have clients with well-documented migraine headaches.

The Eleventh Circuit noted in Wright that:

a diagnosis that is not included in the Listing of Impairments, 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 1, may still be found to be medically equivalent to a listed impairment “[i]f the findings related to” the claimant’s impairment “are at least of equal medical significance to those of a listed impairment.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1526(b)(2).

Headache disorders, including migraine headaches, are not included in the Listing of Impairments. See generally 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 1; see also SSR 19-4p. However, SSR 19-4p, which provides guidance on how the Commissioner evaluates primary headache disorders in disability claims, states that a person with a primary headache disorder may be able to establish that their headache disorder is medically equivalent to epilepsy as listed in Listing 11.02(B) or (D). SSR 19-4p.

Listing 11.02(B) was at issue in Wright.

As the court noted, “Listing 11.02(B) provides that epilepsy must be ‘documented by a detailed description of a typical seizure and characterized by . . . [d]yscognitive seizures . . . occurring at least once a week for at least 3 consecutive months . . . despite adherence to prescribed treatment.’” 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P., app. 1, 11.02(B). The court observed that “[w]hile it is true that the ALJ did fail to cite Listing 11.02 or otherwise discuss SSR 19-4p, the question before us is whether the ALJ included enough information in her decision for this Court to infer that the ALJ considered whether Wright’s migraines met the relevant Listing” and held that it did not.

The court explained that “migraine impairment can be functionally equivalent to Listing 11.02(B) if severe headaches or migraines occur ‘at least once a week for three consecutive months. . . despite adherence to prescribed treatment.’” In evaluating whether a primary headache disorder is “equal in severity and duration to the criteria in 11.02B,” SSR 19-4p states that the ALJ will consider:

• A detailed description from an [acceptable medical source] of a typical headache event, including all associated phenomena (for example, premonitory symptoms, aura, duration, intensity, and accompanying symptoms);

• the frequency of headache events;

• adherence to prescribed treatment;

• side effects of treatment (for example, many medications used for treating a primary headache disorder can produce drowsiness, confusion, or inattention); and

• limitations in functioning that may be associated with the primary headache disorder or effects of its treatment, such as interference with activity during the day (for example, the need for a darkened and quiet room, having to lie down without moving, a sleep disturbance that affects daytime activities, or other related needs and limitations).

The Eleventh Circuit concluded that it lacks sufficient information:

to make this determination because the ALJ’s decision does not show that he considered whether Wright’s migraines meet or medically equal epilepsy under Listing 11.02(B) and SSR 19-4[p]. The ALJ’s decision merely concludes that none of Wright’s impairments, standing alone or in combination, met or medically equaled the severity of one of the listed impairments in the Listing of Impairments. The decision does not discuss Listing 11.02(B) nor does it mention SSR 19-4[p] at all. We contrast this with the fact that the ALJ specifically set forth and analyzed other listings pertaining to Wright’s other severe impairments.

The ALJ’s decision also contains no discussion of a medical source’s description of the migraines (including their duration, intensity, and accompanying symptoms) during the period for which Wright claimed disability, as required by SSR 19-4p. Additionally, while the decision mentions the frequency of Wright’s migraines during the period for which she claimed disability, it fails to address the side effects of the treatment, if any. True, the ALJ’s discussion of Wright’s RFC mentions her migraine headaches, but it does not touch upon all the criteria needed to deny equivalence to a listing.

We thus conclude that the ALJ’s opinion does not contain sufficient information to conclude that the ALJ properly analyzed Wright’s migraines in light of Listing 11.02 and SSR 19-4p.

The Eleventh Circuit did not reference SSR 17-2p in the Wright decision; however, the Commissioner’s argument that no discussion of medical equivalency was needed in light of SSR 17-2p was addressed at oral argument and implicitly rejected.

NOSSCR member Heather Freeman represented Ms. Wright in the Southern District of Florida and Heather and I both represented her before the Eleventh Circuit. I appeared for oral argument before Circuit Judges Rosenbaum, Lagoa and Marcus on April 29, 2026.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOSSCR, its leadership, or staff.

Legislative Spotlight: Improve and Enhance the Work Opportunity Tax Credit Act

Legislative Spotlight: Improve and Enhance the Work Opportunity Tax Credit Act (H.R. 6231 / S. 3265)

Our clients face an uphill battle when trying to navigate the complex landscape of returning to the workforce. This month, we spotlight companion bills pending in both chambers of Congress: H.R. 6231 and S. 3265, the “Improve and Enhance the Work Opportunity Tax Credit Act.”

NOSSCR has a long history of supporting initiatives that provide pathways for claimants who attempt to re-enter the workforce. This legislation would enhance the financial incentive for businesses to hire individuals from vulnerable populations. For our clients navigating the rigid limits of Substantial Gainful Activity or managing the stringent resource rules of SSI, federal hiring incentives can make a difference in securing an accommodating employer.

How We Got Here

This effort began in February 2025, when Representative Lloyd Smucker (R-PA-11) and Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) introduced the original companion bills, H.R. 1177 and S. 492. Those measures attracted genuine bipartisan support—H.R. 1177 drew 16 cosponsors from both parties, and S. 492 was cosponsored by Senators Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and Christopher Coons (D-DE). But the bills faced a structural problem: the WOTC itself was authorized only for employees hired through December 31, 2025, and the original legislation enhanced the credit without extending it. When the hiring deadline passed at the end of last year, the credit lapsed for new hires.

The sponsors addressed this on November 20, 2025, by introducing updated versions—H.R. 6231 and S. 3265—that pair the same enhancements with a five-year extension of the credit itself. These are now the operative vehicles, and the lapse has transformed the debate: what began as a modernization effort is now also a restoration effort, giving the legislation a natural urgency and a plausible path onto any tax package Congress assembles.

Key Technical Updates

The legislation amends the Internal Revenue Code to restore, modernize, and expand the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC—a federal tax credit available to employers for hiring individuals from certain targeted groups):

• Restoring and Extending the Credit: The bills extend the WOTC’s hiring deadline from December 31, 2025 to December 31, 2030, reauthorizing a credit that lapsed for new hires at the end of last year and giving employers five years of planning certainty.
• Boosting the First-Year Credit: The legislation increases the WOTC rate from 40% to 50% for qualified first-year wages up to $6,000, significantly increasing the immediate financial benefit to hiring businesses.
• Encouraging Retention: For employees who perform at least 400 hours of service, the bill adds an additional credit tier of 50% for qualified first-year wages between $6,000 and $12,000.
• Expanding Access for Older Workers: Under the credit as it existed before the lapse, employers could claim the SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program—a federal nutrition assistance program) category only for recipients who were adults under the age of 40. The bill strikes this restrictive age cap, allowing employers to claim the credit for older SNAP recipients who often face compounded hiring discrimination.
• Proportional Adjustments for Targeted Groups: The bill proportionally doubles the enhanced wage caps for qualified veterans (up to $24,000/$48,000 for the most severely service-disabled category), while preserving current-law treatment for summer youth employees (40% of up to $3,000) and long-term family assistance recipients (40% of first-year wages plus the existing 50% second-year credit, each up to $10,000).

Bipartisan Traction

The updated bills launched with bipartisan coalitions in both chambers. In the House, Representative Smucker introduced H.R. 6231 with seven original cosponsors drawn from both parties, including Ways and Means members Mike Kelly (R-PA), Steven Horsford (D-NV), Don Beyer (D-VA), David Kustoff (R-TN), Blake Moore (R-UT), Max Miller (R-OH), and Suzan DelBene (D-WA). On the Senate side, Senator Cassidy introduced S. 3265 with eight original cosponsors split evenly across the aisle: Republicans John Boozman (AR), Roger Marshall (KS), Jerry Moran (KS), and Jim Justice (WV), and Democrats Maggie Hassan (NH), Tim Kaine (VA), Peter Welch (VT), and Catherine Cortez Masto (NV).

Looking Ahead

Both bills are awaiting review within their respective committees—the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance. With the credit now lapsed, WOTC restoration joins the queue of expired tax provisions competing for a spot on the next tax vehicle, and the payroll and employer communities have been pressing the tax-writing committees to act. We will continue monitoring for committee activity and any opportunity to attach the extension to a moving package.

Bring Your Team to Salt Lake City!

New Staff Registration Rate Now Available for NOSSCR’s Fall Conference

We’re thrilled to announce a new registration option designed specifically for support staff attending NOSSCR’s Fall Conference in Salt Lake City! We believe conferences are most valuable when entire teams can experience them together.

The conference will feature training sessions built specifically for staff, giving your team a meaningful opportunity to develop skills, build connections, and grow as a unit. As remote work becomes the norm, gathering in person to collaborate and exchange ideas face-to-face carries added significance.

How the staff rate works:

Once a representative has secured a full in-person registration, they can add staff members at a reduced price (note: this discounted rate is exclusive to in-person attendance, and staff registered this way won’t qualify for CLE credit).

• First staff member: $495
• Each additional staff member: $495 — unless they book a room in the conference hotel block, which lowers their rate to $395

The $395 discount kicks in for the second staff member onward when they:

1. Register through the same primary representative, and
2. Have a verified reservation within the NOSSCR hotel block.

To register staff at these rates, the primary representative should reach out to esterien.keet@nosscr.org with:

• Their own name (as the registered rep)
• Names of the staff members to be added
• Hotel confirmation details (if applying for the lower rate)

Please note: this rate is reserved for non-member support staff attending in person who are not disability representatives and are not pursuing CLE credit.

Bonus for larger teams: Firms bringing more than 15 attendees may qualify for a dedicated private meeting space during the conference — ideal for internal strategy sessions or team check-ins, subject to availability.

More details on staff-focused programming are coming soon. We look forward to welcoming your whole team to Salt Lake City this October!

Circuit Court Considerations: A Roadmap for Losing While Being Right

Adriana de la Torre, NOSSCR Sustaining Member

Liapis v. Bisignano, No. 24-3170 (7th Cir. July 6, 2026)

The Seventh Circuit handed down a decision in Liapis v. Bisignano on July 6, 2026, that every SSD practitioner should have in their back pocket, not because the claimant won, but because the Court spent pages detailing how the ALJ got it wrong, but somehow still affirmed because they were “harmless.”

The Facts

Dimitrios Liapis lives with bipolar disorder, chronic pain, and significant mobility limitations from knee, back, and ankle injuries. A consultative examiner, Dr. Mark Pushkash, found that Liapis’s concentration and persistence would be “markedly impaired” due to the interfering effects of chronic pain and anxiety/depression. The ALJ called that opinion “generally unpersuasive” and denied benefits. Liapis appealed on that single issue, the ALJ’s treatment of Dr. Pushkash’s opinion.

Where the ALJ Went Wrong, Four Times

The Seventh Circuit didn’t mince words. The ALJ’s persuasiveness analysis fell apart in four distinct ways:

1. Backwards analysis under § 404.1520c. The regulation requires the ALJ to explain supportability and consistency, the two mandatory factors. Instead, the ALJ built his rejection entirely on discretionary factors (the examining relationship, specialization) and never addressed the two factors the regulation actually requires him to discuss. The court called this exactly what it was: getting the analysis backwards.
2. Selective one-time-exam critique. The ALJ discounted Pushkash for seeing Liapis only once, but all four other medical sources also examined him a single time, and their opinions were credited without issue. The court cited Myles v. Astrue for the principle that an ALJ may not selectively consider medical reports.
3. Lane confusion on pain and cognition. The ALJ reasoned a psychologist couldn’t speak to pain’s effects on mental functioning, despite crediting a different psychologist who said the same thing about Liapis’s pain and adaptive functioning. The court called the inconsistency illogical and reaffirmed, citing Simila v. Astrue and Carradine v. Barnhart, that pain-driven cognitive limitations are squarely within a psychologist’s expertise.
4. Mischaracterizing the treatment as “conservative.” The ALJ ignored a regimen that included lithium and quetiapine (Seroquel), among the most aggressive psychiatric medications available, a documented lithium toxicity episode, and two ankle surgeries within a year, including a fusion. The court, citing Scrogham v. Colvin, noted that willingness to undergo risky surgery and take powerful medication reflects genuine symptom severity, not conservative management.

So the Claimant Won, Right?

No. This is the part worth sitting with.

The ALJ found moderate limitations in interacting with others, concentrating/persisting/maintaining pace, and adapting/managing oneself, and a mild limitation in understanding/remembering/applying information. To meet a listing, a claimant needs two marked limitations (or one extreme) across those four paragraph B domains.

Even fully crediting Pushkash’s opinion, only one domain, concentration, persistence, and pace, would move from moderate to marked. Every other source in the record agreed Liapis was largely unimpaired there, and nothing in the record suggested marked limitation in any other domain. One marked limitation isn’t enough. Harmless error.

The Takeaway for Your Briefs

Legal error in an ALJ’s persuasiveness analysis is real, and often correctable on appeal. But if your challenge rests on a single medical opinion, run the math before you file: does crediting that opinion actually flip a paragraph B finding from moderate to marked in enough domains to matter? If the other domains are locked in regardless, harmless error will eat your win before you ever reach the merits.

“The ALJ got it wrong” and “the ALJ’s decision gets reversed” are two different arguments. Liapis is a reminder to make sure you’re prepared to win both.

Got any questions? Schedule a consultation with us. I’m here to help. It’s a lot to take in, but we’ll get through it together. After all, navigating these waters is always easier when you’ve got someone to chat with.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOSSCR, its leadership, or staff.

PAC Contributor List

THANK YOU TO OUR NOSSCR PAC CONTRIBUTORS

As of July 2026

Contributions to the National Organization of Social Security Claimants’ Representatives PAC (NOSSCR PAC) are not tax-deductible as a charitable contribution for federal income tax purposes. Contributions to NOSSCR PAC will be used to support federal and state candidates, political parties, and other political committees.  Contributions are strictly voluntary.  You may refuse to contribute without reprisal.  Any proposed contribution level is merely a suggestion, and you are free to contribute more or less than suggested.  You will not benefit or be disadvantaged by reason of the amount of your contribution or a decision not to contribute.  Federal law requires NOSSCR PAC to use its best efforts to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation and employer of persons whose contributions exceed $200 in a calendar year.  You must be a U.S. citizen or lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the U.S. to contribute.

SSAB Releases 2026 SSI Statement

From the Social Security Advisory Board (SSAB):

On July 24, the Social Security Advisory Board (SSAB) released a new report highlighting opportunities to modernize Supplemental Security Income (SSI) reporting processes. Each year, SSI recipients report over 10 million changes in income, resources, and living arrangements, most of which must be manually processed by the Social Security Administration (SSA). When changes are reported late, received without  sufficient detail, or processed too slowly, improper payments may occur.

Amy Shuart, Chair of SSAB, released the following statement:  

“Making it easier for SSI recipients to accurately and timely report changes is good for the Social Security Administration, the people it serves, and taxpayers. The recommendations in this report build on the agency’s ongoing efforts to improve the SSI program’s administration and offer new digital tools.”

The Board identified several challenges that hinder accurate and timely reporting, including limited online tools, the lack of a way for recipients to review the accuracy of their records, and the absence of mechanisms to ensure complete reporting and documentation.

To address these issues, the Board recommends SSA take the following actions:

1. Develop a user-friendly SSI snapshot that displays case facts currently on the SSI record that recipients and their representatives can view;  
2. Develop an SSI mobile app that enables SSI recipients and their representatives to easily fulfill reporting responsibilities in addition to those methods now available;    
3. Consider enhancing the existing SSI monthly wage reporting tools to accept additional types of income-related reports; and  
4. Evaluate the feasibility and risks of introducing auto-processing of other categories of SSI change reports to reduce SSA staff workloads.  

Strengthening user-friendly digital self-service options, improving transparency, and enabling more automated processing for SSI reporting could significantly enhance accuracy, efficiency, and the recipient’s experience.

Read the full report here.

NEW Searchable Sustaining Member List

Your feedback in action! Introducing our new searchable Sustaining Member list!

In addition to conference and webinar discounts, NOSSCR’s Sustaining Members enjoy the option of having their webpage and federal brief writing status displayed to the entire NOSSCR membership. Check out the new list and update your information by following the steps below.

How to access the list:

• Login to NOSSCR’s Membership Portal
• Click on the tab labeled Sustaining Member Directory
• To view all Sustaining Members, click “Search”
• To view Sustaining Members from a particular state, select the state from the dropdown menu and click search
• To view Sustaining Members who practice federal court in a specific state, select one state at a time and click search
• To view Sustaining Members who have self-identified as Federal Court Brief Writers, select “yes” and click search

NOTE: If you are a Sustaining Member and you do not appear on this list, OR, if you do appear on this list but your information is not complete / correct, please take a moment to edit your profile.

How to edit your profile:

Option 1:

• Complete this form

Option 2:

• Login to NOSSCR’s Membership Portal
• Click on “My Profile”
• Click on the blue “Edit Profile” button
• Make changes
• Scroll back up and click the “Save Profile” button
• Tip: Be sure to update your headshot in the top left corner of your profile

New Nonprofit Referral Question:

When updating your information, you will see a new question asking if you accept referrals from our Nonprofit Members, and, if so, what types of referrals. This question is part of our new initiative to better connect our Nonprofit Members with other members who may be able to offer assistance.

To upgrade your Regular membership to Sustaining, please email us at nosscr@nosscr.org.

Help Needed! Post-Entitlement Claims

Did you know that NOSSCR’s Referral Service connects claimants looking for representation with our participating members? Right now, we’re seeing more callers asking for help with post-entitlement claims than we have members available to assist, and we’d love to close that gap.

If you’re able to take on post-entitlement claims, we’d appreciate it if you could update your membership profile to let us know. We know these claims are often non-fee-generating, so this is especially helpful for our nonprofit members — and if any of our for-profit members have room for a pro-bono case or two, we’d welcome that as well.

Our goal is to build a free, reliable pathway connecting claimants with members who can help. If this is something you’re able to take on, please complete this form letting us know what types of claims you can accept and any restrictions on referrals, so we can match you thoughtfully.

And if post-entitlement claims aren’t something you’re comfortable with yet, no worries at all. NOSSCR frequently provides trainings on post-entitlement issues — we’d love to help get you up to speed.

Daily Dose of Data from SSA

This month, Social Security released the following updates:

• Recurring Actuarial Note #6: Disability and Death Probability Tables for Insured Workers

• Actuarial Study #130 (July 2026): Social Security Disability Insurance Program Disabled-Worker Experience 

• 2026 SSI Annual Report and related materials

• Presentation Slides from Chief Actuary Karen Glenn and Actuaries Daniel Nickerson and Jason Schultz from a session entitled “Social Security Update”

• Monthly Statistical Snapshot, June 2026

• SSI Monthly Statistics, June 2026

Useful Resources