Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What specific 2023–2024 SSA policy changes affect evidence standards in Continuing Disability Reviews?
Executive summary
The Social Security Administration (SSA) issued a rule in late 2024 clarifying how adjudicators treat evidence of disability, effective November 25, 2024, and proposed/issued several 2023–2024 regulatory actions that touch evidence standards and how CDRs evaluate medical and vocational information (notably changes to “close proximity of time” flexibility and a proposal to shorten the past relevant work window from 15 to 5 years) [1] [2]. Available sources do not provide a single, consolidated “CDR evidence overhaul” but instead show multiple related regulatory moves that affect what evidence adjudicators may rely on and how long past work is considered [1] [2] [3].
1. What the November 2024 “Evidence of Disability” rule actually does
The Federal Register rule titled “Evidence of Disability” clarifies SSA’s regulatory language about applicants’ obligation to submit all evidence and gives adjudicators explicit authority to make fully favorable allowance determinations when the evidence already in the record is “complete and detailed enough” — without waiting for additional requests for evidence that the adjudicator judges unnecessary [1]. The rule became effective November 25, 2024, and is framed as aligning evidence requirements with existing SSA regulations and policy [1].
2. How that change shifts the burden and timing for CDR and initial decisions
By expressly allowing adjudicators to decide favorably based on an existing complete record, the rule reduces procedural friction where additional evidence would not change the result and empowers adjudicators to stop chasing unnecessary paperwork [1]. The source frames this as consistent with SSA policy and meant to permit fully favorable determinations when the record is sufficient — a change in administrative emphasis rather than a new medical standard [1].
3. “Close proximity of time” flexibilities tied to the COVID PHE and musculoskeletal listings
SSA extended temporary flexibility in evaluating what counts as “close proximity of time” for medical evidence after the COVID-19 public health emergency ended May 11, 2023, continuing that flexibility through May 11, 2025, to allow study of changing healthcare practices — specifically referencing musculoskeletal disorder listings [2]. That extension affects how dated medical evidence (imaging, exam notes) may be treated in evaluations, an important practical change for both initial disability determinations and CDRs where timing of records matters [2].
4. Proposed vocational evidence change: past relevant work window shortened
SSA proposed reducing the definition of Past Relevant Work (PRW) from a 15-year lookback to a 5-year period in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (intermediate improvement to the disability adjudication process) — a change SSA argued would focus decisions on more current, relevant information and reduce burden [2] [3]. That proposed change affects how adjudicators evaluate vocational evidence during initial decisions and potentially CDRs that reassess functional ability in light of recent work history [2] [3].
5. Interaction with CDR standards and medical-improvement framework
Continuing Disability Reviews (CDRs) are legally governed by the medical improvement standard and related regulations; SSA still bases CDRs on “weight of the evidence” and neutral evaluation of current condition, per statutes and CFR provisions [4] [5] [6]. The changes above modify how and when evidence is treated (e.g., allowing favorable decisions from an already-sufficient record; extending timing flexibilities for medical documentation), but sources show these are procedural/regulatory clarifications rather than wholesale changes to the medical-improvement legal standard used in CDRs [1] [5] [6].
6. Practical effects and competing perspectives
Supporters argue the evidence rule reduces unnecessary administrative delays and lets adjudicators grant benefits sooner when records suffice [1]. Advocates for claimants can point to the PRW five-year proposal as making adjudications more centered on recent work and less likely to penalize older job history [3]. Conversely, critics worried about program integrity or uniformity may view looser timing rules (the PHE “close proximity” flexibility) as introducing variability; SSA framed extensions as temporary and evaluative, not permanent lowering of standards [2]. The Federal Register rule itself was presented as aligning practice with existing policy rather than changing substantive disability criteria [1].
7. What reporting does not say — limits of current sources
Available sources do not claim a blanket lowering or raising of medical standards in CDRs; they document procedural clarifications (evidence handling), temporary timing flexibilities tied to post‑PHE conditions, and a proposal to shorten the PRW period [1] [2] [3]. Detailed implementation guidance for adjudicators on how these changes play out in day‑to‑day CDR decisions is not provided in the cited materials; training materials or later POMS updates are not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting).
8. Bottom line for beneficiaries and practitioners
If you’re facing a CDR or filing a claim, ensure your most recent, detailed medical records are in the file — SSA’s rules now explicitly let adjudicators decide on the strength of the existing record [1], and SSA has temporarily relaxed timing requirements for certain musculoskeletal evidence post‑PHE [2]. Watch for final rulemaking on PRW and any specific POMS or local DDS instructions translating these regulatory changes into adjudicator practice [3] [1].