DDS determined the claimant is disabled at step 5 of sequential evaluation, without first completing step 4. A review of the case file shows there is insufficient vocational evidence to make a vocational determination.
CASE DISCUSSION & POLICY ANALYSIS (INCLUDING SPECIFIC REFERENCES)
This 58-year-old claimant is filing a DIB claim alleging disability since 05/12/2017 due to loss of balance, neck injury, loss of strength, anxiety, restless leg syndrome, and acid reflux as of 11/30/2015.
The RFC the DDS assessed is reasonably supported by the evidence in file. However, there is a work issue. The claimant listed six jobs on the SSA 3369. All jobs are adequately described to determine the claimant is unable to return to this work as described. The claimant indicated he worked each job from 1984-2011. It is unclear what is meant by this. Per DI 22515.001B.4 a complete detailed description is needed for each job held during the relevant period in order to complete sequential evaluation. This includes dates worked at each position held. Without this information, it is not possible to determine if this work meets the …show more content…
At least 50 percent of his time was spent supervising. In the remarks section he indicated at job #3 he was responsible for making sure all assignments were completed. He worked on computers and completed paperwork. It is not clear what this entailed. For example did he make schedules, order supplies, was he responsible for bookkeeping? It is not possible to make an accurate DOT match, without these details. At Step 4 of Sequential Evaluation, a function-by-function comparison must be made between a claimant's PRW and their RFC/MRFC before proceeding to Step 5. It is critical for the adjudicator to make a sound and supportable determination of what the claimant can do functionally and how this relates to the physical, mental and environmental demands of PRW (POMS DI 25005.001A & B; SSR
CASE DISCUSSION & POLICY ANALYSIS (INCLUDING SPECIFIC REFERENCES)
This 58-year-old claimant is filing a DIB claim alleging disability since 05/12/2017 due to loss of balance, neck injury, loss of strength, anxiety, restless leg syndrome, and acid reflux as of 11/30/2015.
The RFC the DDS assessed is reasonably supported by the evidence in file. However, there is a work issue. The claimant listed six jobs on the SSA 3369. All jobs are adequately described to determine the claimant is unable to return to this work as described. The claimant indicated he worked each job from 1984-2011. It is unclear what is meant by this. Per DI 22515.001B.4 a complete detailed description is needed for each job held during the relevant period in order to complete sequential evaluation. This includes dates worked at each position held. Without this information, it is not possible to determine if this work meets the …show more content…
At least 50 percent of his time was spent supervising. In the remarks section he indicated at job #3 he was responsible for making sure all assignments were completed. He worked on computers and completed paperwork. It is not clear what this entailed. For example did he make schedules, order supplies, was he responsible for bookkeeping? It is not possible to make an accurate DOT match, without these details. At Step 4 of Sequential Evaluation, a function-by-function comparison must be made between a claimant's PRW and their RFC/MRFC before proceeding to Step 5. It is critical for the adjudicator to make a sound and supportable determination of what the claimant can do functionally and how this relates to the physical, mental and environmental demands of PRW (POMS DI 25005.001A & B; SSR