dfm's blog

Reconsideration Approval Data by State

dfm — Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:12:53 +0000

Reconsideration Approval Data by State

As a follow-up to my last post on initial application approval data by state, I thought it useful to compile state statistics on reconsideration approval rates. While many attorneys and disability advocates focus solely on approval rates at the hearing level, knowing initial and recon approval rates can help project short-term receivables needed to pay overhead and staffing costs and assist in calculating future hearing workload for attorneys and advocates.

2016 Reconsideration Allowance Rate by State¹

State	Region Code	Determinations	Allowances	Allowance Rate
AR	DAL	10710	1008	9.41%
AZ	SFO	7221	950	13.16%
CT	BOS	7802	1012	12.97%
DC	PHL	1511	232	15.35%
DE	PHL	1825	193	10.58%
EA²	DAL	44	5	11.36%
EM²	ATL	3851	249	6.47%
EO²	DAL	1858	221	11.89%
EV²	PHL	3044	450	14.78%
FE²	FED	99025	16298	16.46%
FL	ATL	58361	7307	12.52%
GA	ATL	10223	1369	13.39%
HI	SFO	2119	259	12.22%
IA	KCM	8312	779	9.37%
ID	SEA	2991	442	14.78%
IL	CHI	15303	1854	12.12%
IN	CHI	19857	1857	9.35%
KS	KCM	4205	747	17.76%
KY	ATL	20151	1671	8.29%
MA	BOS	13056	2954	22.63%
MD	PHL	10423	1537	14.75%
ME	BOS	2712	368	13.57%
MN	CHI	10728	935	8.72%
MS	ATL	15703	1055	6.72%
MT	DEN	1591	238	14.96%
NC	ATL	29950	2951	9.85%
ND	DEN	970	133	13.71%
NE	KCM	3093	358	11.57%
NJ	NYC	11271	1593	14.13%
NM	DAL	1672	305	18.24%
NV	SFO	2230	332	14.89%
OH	CHI	32892	3767	11.45%
OK	DAL	12623	1331	10.54%
OR	SEA	10576	1118	10.57%
PR	NYC	4216	532	12.62%
RI	BOS	3249	442	13.60%
SC	ATL	9192	1076	11.71%
SD	DEN	1007	134	13.31%
TN	ATL	15820	1420	8.98%
TX	DAL	41929	5778	13.78%
UT	DEN	4866	489	10.05%
VA	PHL	13595	2058	15.14%
VT	BOS	1256	176	14.01%
WA	SEA	15512	2232	14.39%
WI	CHI	11445	2218	19.38%
WV	PHL	8937	878	9.82%
WY	DEN	718	112	15.60%

Excluding prototype states³, the 2016 national reconsideration approval was 12.89%. Clearly, the overwhelming majority or reconsideration requests were denied.

Below are the top five states in 2016 with the highest reconsideration approval rate and states with the largest year-over-year increases in approval rate.

States with Highest Reconsideration Approval Rates

State	Region Code	Determinations	Allowances	Allowance Rate
MA	BOS	13056	2954	22.63%
WI	CHI	11445	2218	19.38%
NM	DAL	1672	305	18.24%
KS	KCM	4205	747	17.76%
FE**	FED	99025	16298	16.46%
WY	DEN	718	112	15.60%

States with Largest Increase in Reconsideration Approval Rate

State	Region Code	2015 Allowance Rate	2016 Allowance Rate	% Change
WI	CHI	13.87%	19.38%	39.75%
IN	CHI	7.23%	9.35%	29.41%
FE	FED	13.24%	16.46%	24.29%
SD	DEN	11.02%	13.31%	20.73%
VA	PHL	12.64%	15.14%	19.77%
AZ	SFO	11.04%	13.16%	19.15%
WV	DEN	8.42%	9.82%	16.74%

While state reconsideration approval rates by themselves may not be of much utility, when used in conjunction with initial and hearing approval data, they can help your firm project cash flow and fees to manage your business most efficiently.

¹Statistics provided by https://www.ssa.gov/disability/data/ssa-sa-mowl.htm. Allowance Rate calculated by dividing Allowances by Determinations within the original dataset.

²EA, EO, EV, and EM are extended service team sites in the states of AR, OK, VA, and MS. FE denotes federal components that can assist state agencies.

³Starting on 10/01/1999, “prototype states” were identified in which denied initial claims would bypass reconsideration and be referred directly to hearing. Prototype states vary by year. The following prototype states have been omitted from the list: Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, and Pennsylvania.

dfm Thu, 03/23/2017 - 12:12

Initial Application Approval Data by State

dfm — Mon, 02 Jan 2017 16:58:41 +0000

Initial Application Approval Data by State

When discussing approval rates within the context of Social Security Disability law, attorneys and disability advocates often focus on ODAR hearing approval rates. Indeed, hearing approval rates provide great insight to third-party representatives into the attractiveness of cases in certain ODARs. However, recognizing the fluctuation in approval data at the initial adjudication level may prove vital in constructing an effective business model for your disability practice.

Previously, my understanding of initial application approval data consisted of knowing that roughly two-thirds of disability applications are denied, and I had assumed that this figure remained constant across the country. It was only when a customer asked me whether we had compiled statistics on initial application approvals by state that I began to investigate.

In an ideal world where cash flow was not an issue, it would be best to have all cases at the hearing level in ODARs with long waiting periods and high approval rates. This would maximize the chances of receiving favorable decisions at the maximum allowable fee.

However, as this customer explained to me, firms rely on a certain percentage of initial application approvals to pay overhead and staffing costs, while they await decisions and payments from hearing stage cases. Further, swift initial application approvals offer great financial benefit to claimants.

Below is the 2015 data that the Social Security Administration has published on its website.*

2015 Initial Application Approval Data

State	Region Code	All Determinations	Favorable	Favorable %
AK	SEA	4341	2200	50.68%
AL	ATL	70291	18927	26.93%
AR	DAL	40612	12630	31.10%
AZ	SFO	43150	11687	27.08%
CA	SFO	221045	74472	33.69%
CO	DEN	28947	9058	31.29%
CT	BOS	25386	7887	31.07%
DC	PHL	7198	2465	34.25%
DE	PHL	7106	2512	35.35%
FL	ATL	189076	57716	30.53%
GA	ATL	81308	23070	28.37%
HI	SFO	7100	2367	33.34%
IA	KCM	21000	8109	38.61%
ID	SEA	12221	4558	37.30%
IL	CHI	81966	27701	33.80%
IN	CHI	65872	20451	31.05%
KS	KCM	14322	5509	38.47%
KY	ATL	53536	15866	29.64%
LA	DAL	41335	15504	37.51%
MA	BOS	51016	20728	40.63%
MD	PHL	41186	13705	33.28%
ME	BOS	12221	4383	35.86%
MI	CHI	92565	30283	32.72%
MN	CHI	35019	12107	34.57%
MO	KCM	65053	22833	35.10%
MS	ATL	44996	11603	25.79%
MT	DEN	8030	2917	36.33%
NC	ATL	98329	26093	26.54%
ND	DEN	3666	1520	41.46%
NE	KCM	10417	4230	40.61%
NH	BOS	9980	4795	48.05%
NJ	NYC	58801	22852	38.86%
NM	DAL	10576	4472	42.28%
NV	SFO	12929	5187	40.12%
NY	NYC	153035	56155	36.69%
OH	CHI	111291	37475	33.67%
OK	DAL	37833	12342	32.62%
OR	SEA	31438	11057	35.17%
PA	PHL	131806	40639	30.83%
PR	NYC	12081	5197	43.02%
RI	BOS	9861	3244	32.90%
SC	ATL	50798	14897	29.33%
SD	DEN	5692	2246	39.46%
TN	ATL	65711	17896	27.23%
TX	DAL	197099	67188	34.09%
UT	DEN	11637	4269	36.68%
VA	PHL	51522	19596	38.03%
VT	BOS	4992	2164	43.35%
WA	SEA	52280	19788	37.85%
WI	CHI	42410	15266	36.00%
WV	PHL	23598	6783	28.74%
WY	DEN	2749	1340	48.74%

States with Largest Increase in Initial Approval Rate

State	2014 Approval %	2015 Approval %	Change
DE	30.49%	35.35%	15.95%
LA	33.79%	37.51%	11.02%
KY	26.75%	29.64%	10.77%
NM	38.47%	42.28%	9.93%
AK	46.50%	50.68%	8.99%
ME	33.07%	35.86%	8.45%
OK	30.22%	32.62%	7.95%
NV	37.18%	40.12%	7.90%
CT	28.94%	31.07%	7.37%
MD	31.04%	33.28%	7.19%

The 2015 national approval rate at the initial level was almost exactly 33%. But, the favorable determination rate ranged from 25.8% (Mississippi) to 50.7% (Alaska). Further, 10 states had favorable determination rates of 40% or higher.

Using this data in conjunction with the ODAR approval rates can help firms project and manage cash flow effectively when expanding to new geographic areas. Further, the statistics can assist in providing realistic expectations to claimants about wait times and chances of approval.

* Statistics provided by https://www.ssa.gov/disability/data/SSA-SA-FYWL.csv. "Approval %" calculated by dividing "All Favorable Determinations" by "All Determinations" within original dataset.

dfm Mon, 01/02/2017 - 11:58

OASDI in America and Abroad

dfm — Thu, 08 Sep 2016 19:47:33 +0000

OASDI in America and Abroad

The fiscal health of the Social Security program continues to prove itself a politically contentious topic. Placing politics on the sideline, I found myself wondering how the equivalents of SSA’s Old Age, Disability, and Survivors program functioned in other parts of the world. Since both recipients and politicians often criticize the American Social Security system, I decided to peruse the SSA’s Social Security Programs Throughout the World reports to find out about OASDI benefits programs in the top four countries by GDP.*

I attempted to isolate the following criteria to focus on government disability benefits programs in those countries:

Eligible recipients
Individual contribution rates
Employer contribution rates
Maximum annual earnings for contribution calculation
Definition of disability
Work history requirement
Option for partial/temporary disability
Maximum monthly benefit

United States (GDP - $18.6 trillion)

Eligible Recipients	Gainfully employed persons
Individual Contribution	6.2% of covered earnings
Employer Contribution	6.2% of covered payroll
Max Taxable Earnings	$118,500.00
Disabled Definition	Incapable of substantial gainful employment as a result of a physical or mental impairment that is expected to last one year or result in death.
Work Requirement	Usually 5 of the 10 years before disability began (exceptions for younger applicants)
Partial/Temp. Disability Option	No
Max Monthly Benefit	$2639.00

China (GDP - $16.5 trillion)

China’s OASDI program is comprised primarily of basic pension insurance and a mandatory individual account. Here are the figures for insured employees.

Eligible Recipients	Employees in urban enterprises and urban institutions; managed as enterprises; casual workers*
Individual Contribution	None for basic pension insurance; 8% of gross insured earnings for mandatory individual account
Employer Contribution	Up to 20% of payroll for basic pension insurance; none for mandatory individual account
Max Taxable Earnings	300% of local average wage of previous year
Disabled Definition	Total incapacity for work and ineligible for an early old-age pension, as assessed by medical experts of the Labor Ability Appraisal Committee.
Work Requirement	Not published in report
Partial/Temp. Disability Option	Yes
Max Monthly Benefit	40% of insured’s monthly wage paid from basic insurance for permanent disability; 100% of insured wage for up to 12 months with one 12-month extension permitted for temporary benefits.

Japan (GDP - $4.4 trillion)

Japan’s OASDI system is comprised primarily of a national pension program that is supplemented by employees’ pension insurance. Below are the statistics for insured persons.

Eligible Recipients	Residents aged 20 to 59, voluntary coverage for residents aged 60-64, and Japanese citizens residing abroad (national pension system); employees covered in firms in industry and commerce (employees’ pension insurance)
Individual Contribution	None for basic pension insurance; 8% of gross insured earnings for mandatory individual account
Employer Contribution	8.737% of monthly payroll*
Max Taxable Earnings	620,000 yen per month
Disabled Definition	Defined as Group I (total disability requiring constant attendance) or Group II (severely restricted ability to live independently)*
Work Requirement	Must be insured at first medical exam and have paid contributions for 66.7% of the period from age 20 to two months before the month of first medical exam, or must have paid continuous contributions for one year from age 20 to two months before the month of first medical exam for the national pension program.
Partial/Temp. Disability Option	Yes
Max Monthly Benefit	966,000 yen annually for Group I disability and 772,800 yen annually for Group II disability from the national pension program; 125% of old-age employees’ pension for Group I disability, 100% for Group II disability, 100% for Group III disability

Germany (GDP - $3.5 trillion)

Eligible Recipients	Employed persons, certain self-employed persons, military personnel
Individual Contribution	9.45% of monthly earnings over €850*
Employer Contribution	9.45% of monthly payroll; 15% of earnings for employees earning less than €450 per month
Max Taxable Earnings	€71,400.00
Disabled Definition	Full loss of working capacity and unable to work more than three hours per day in any form of work.
Work Requirement	5 years of contributions and 36 months of compulsory contributions in the last 5 years before disability began
Partial/Temp. Disability Option	Yes
Max Monthly Benefit	Calculated by multiplying pre-determined individual earning points by the pension factor and the pension value.

It is important to note that the aforementioned statistics and definitions neither comprise the entirety of the rules and regulations for the respective counties nor account for disability approval rates. Nevertheless, it sheds some insight on how the American system compares to other parts of the economically developed world. While the U.S. system is far from perfect, it boasts relatively low contribution rates. But, it also has a very strict definition of disability, strict work history requirement, and high maximum taxable earnings amount.

* List by the International Monetary Fund, Estimates for 2016
* All statistics obtained from the SSA's Social Security Programs Throughout the World reports
* China utilizes a different contribution and payout system for rural and non-salaried urban workers
* This is reduced for monthly earnings from €450.01 to €850; none for monthly earnings up to €450
* Based on 30 pre-established wage classes. 8.844% for miners and seamen.
* Ibid.
* This is true for both the national pension program and employees’ pension insurance.

dfm Thu, 09/08/2016 - 15:47

Digesting the SSA's Annual Report on the Disability Insurance Program

dfm — Fri, 17 Jun 2016 18:56:17 +0000

Digesting the SSA's Annual Report on the Disability Insurance Program

Each year, the SSA publishes its “Annual Statistical Report on the Social Disability Insurance Program.” This report, usually released at the end of each calendar year, features a plethora of statistics that chronicle the amount of disability payments, analyze approval ratings, profile disability recipients, and more.

At almost 200 pages, this document can prove a bit overwhelming to digest, but its contents shed light on the state of the program as a whole and can help you identify strategies to position your business in the best possible manner for the upcoming years. Below are some of the highlights from last year’s report, which was released in November 2015.*

Beneficiaries

As of December 2014, 10,261,268 people were receiving Social Security disability benefits. 87.3% were disabled workers, 10.2% disabled adult children, and 2.5% disabled widow(er)s. This number is up 0.3% from the previous year.

The average age of a disabled-worker beneficiary was 53.

Beneficiaries by State

The states with the highest percentage of disabled beneficiaries were Alabama (8.5%), Arkansas (8.4%), Kentucky (8.2%), Maine (7.7%,) Mississippi (7.9%), and West Virginia (8.9%). Alaska and Hawaii had the lowest incidence of disabled beneficiaries, with both at less than 3% of the state population.

Benefit Amounts

The average monthly benefit amount was $1165.39 for disabled workers (up 1.7% from 2013), $314.53 for spouses of disabled workers (up 2.2% from 2013), $349.01 for children of disabled workers (up 2.2% from 2013), $724.07 for widow(er)s (up 1.0% from 2013), and $751.12 for adult children (up 2.2% from 2013).

The average monthly benefit for male disabled workers was $1290.20, compare to 1031.90 for women.

Diagnostic Groups

The SSA keeps statistics on the percentage allocation of the various disabilities of beneficiaries. Below are the reasons disabled workers received benefits in December 2014:

Disability Type	Percentage of Beneficiaries
Musculoskeltal System/Connective Tissue	31.2%
Other Mental Disorders	26.9%
All Other Impairments	17.0%
Nervous System and Sense Organs	9.3%
Circulatory System	8.3%
Intellectual Disability	4.1%
Endocrine/nutritional/metabolic diseases	3.2%

Diseases of the musculoskeltal system and connective tissue constituted the primary reason disabled workers received benefits, followed by other mental disorders.

What This Means for Social Security Attorneys

In isolation, the immediate utility of these statistics may elude disability attorneys and advocates. However, analyzing the disabled beneficiaries data can offer a larger statistical picture of your clients and can be helpful when creating realistic expectations for your clients about the disability application and approval process. Lastly, when used in conjunction ODAR approval data, this information can help you identify geographic markets and conditions that stand the best chance for approval, whether you direct your own advertising or purchase Social Security disability leads.

*Statistics obtained from the SSA's Annual Statistical Report on the Social Security Disability Insurance Program, 2014, which can be found at www.ssa.gov.

dfm Fri, 06/17/2016 - 14:56

2016 Social Security Changes That You Should Know About

dfm — Wed, 09 Mar 2016 22:26:37 +0000

2016 Social Security Changes That You Should Know About

The start of each year introduces the possibility of the SSA implementing drastic changes that citizens and pundits alike fear will one day be inevitable. Fortunately, based on the annual Fact Sheet released by the SSA, 2016 will not be one of those years. Nevertheless, Social Security attorneys and advocates should be aware of important changes that can affect both your clients and your bottom line in 2016.

Cost of Living
The Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers changed little from 2014 Q3 and 2015 Q3 (234.242 to 233.278). On account of this decrease, there is no Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) in 2016.

Taxes
The Social Security portion (OASDI) of the FICA tax rate will remain 6.20% for employees and the 12.40% for self-employed individuals. The maximum taxable earnings for Social Security (OASDI only) will not increase from the 2015 threshold of $118,500.

Maximum Social Security Benefit
Since there is no COLA in 2016, the maximum benefit decreased to $2663/month from $2639/month in 2015. This is a decrease of 0.90% from the previous year.

Substantial Gainful Activity and Trial Work Period
The SGA thresholds have increased to $1130/month from $1090/month for non-blind individuals and remained at $1820/month for blind individuals. The Trial Work Period (TWP) threshold was raised by 3.8% to $810/month.

SSI Payments, Resource Limits, and Student Exclusion
SSI individual and couple federal payments remain unchanged at $733/month and $1100/month, respectively. Similarly, the SSI resource limits will stay at $2000/month for individuals and $3000/month for couples. Lastly, there was no change to the SSI student exclusion limits, which is $1780/month and $7180 annually.

Below is a summary table of the main statistics previously described:

Statistic	2016 Amount/Rate	2015 Amount/Rate	Change
COLA	N/A	N/A	None
OASDI Employee Tax Rate	7.65%	7.65%	None
OASDI Self-Employed Tax Rate	15.30%	15.30%	None
Max Taxable OASDI Earnings	$118,500	$118,500	None
Max Social Security Benefit	$2639/month	$2663/month	-0.90%
Quarter of Coverage	$1260/quarter	$1220/quarter	+3.2%
Federal SSI Individual Payment	$733/month	$733/month	None
Federal SSI Couple Payment	$1100/month	$1100/month	None

*All figures obtained from the SSA Fact Sheet of 2016 Social Security Changes

As the table above displays, the SSA has modified very little for 2016. The maximum Social Security benefit declined by less than one percent, due to no COLA, and the amount required for a quarter of coverage increased by about 3%. Unfortunately, the CPI-W decreased to 231.061 in January 2016, which is even lower than the 2015 Q3 figure. Although this does not bode well for a 2017 COLA, this figure could change as 2016 progresses. Overall, the encouraging news is that, judging from these numbers, very little should change for your Social Security clients and the amount of third-party representative fees in 2016, provided that approval rates remain constant.

dfm Wed, 03/09/2016 - 17:26

Grow Your Law Practice Efficiently and Profitably in 2016

dfm — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 21:09:34 +0000

Grow Your Law Practice Efficiently and Profitably in 2016

Whether you practice Employment Law, Personal Injury, Social Security Disability, or Workers' Compensation, the start of a new year is a great time to reflect on the state of your law practice and to formulate a strategy for the upcoming year. Putting your goals on paper can be an effective way to stick to a plan and to hold yourself accountable. Studies have shown that those who write down their goals can be up to 50% more successful in accomplishing them than those with unwritten goals.¹ Further, with over 1.3 million licensed lawyers² in the United States and over $890 million³ spent in legal advertising for 2015 alone, it is crucial to define yourself within such a competitive landscape.

While working in Client Services at eGenerationMarketing, I have taken part in many end-of-year legal lead performance reviews with attorneys and disability advocates. Using some of these discussions as a foundation, I wanted to offer some tips and suggestions, as well as to comment on some trends observed from those law firms and disability practices that have performed well with Internet case lead generation and have significantly grown their practices over the past few years. It is worth keeping these in mind as you create a strategy and goals for 2016.

Make Data-Driven Advertising Decisions

This is perhaps the most important of all the suggestions listed in this post. Too often, attorneys and advocates do not have vital advertising performance stats at their fingertips. Regarding legal lead generation (e.g., television, radio, internet, etc.), you should be able to access reports that include, at a minimum, contact, desired, and signed rates for all lead sources.⁴

Without this information at your disposal, it will be difficult to isolate those sources delivering the lowest cost-per-acquisition and to prune sources that are underperforming. By identifying the highest performing sources, you can increase your advertising spend in a more methodical manner.

When making your advertising creatives, keep key demographic data in mind, such as the fact that 38% of people find an attorney via the web, 25% of people use YouTube to research legal topics, or that 96% of people obtain legal advice online.⁵

Expand Smartly

Clients frequently contact us about about adding additional case lead volume from new geographic areas. When adding territories for any lead source or medium, ask your legal lead generation provider whether they have any markets that are undersold, or any promotions for purchasing additional case leads. This can help lower both your advertising spend and cost-per-acquistion, provided that the source in question is already performing well.

Depending on what practice area your firm focuses, you may also want to consider other data sources before increasing your spend. With disability law, for example, it would be prudent to analyze ODAR approval rates before purchasing leads in a new market.

Improve Efficiency

In addition to reviewing your lead performance stats, steps can be taken to render your existing practice more efficient to increase profitability. Some attorneys with whom I speak still track their client lists and case statuses with Excel sheets.

While Excel may accomplish the task, it is easy to make errors and can become quite messy. Thus, it will be nearly impossible to scale your practice efficiently without effective client management software. Ideally, you would use software that allows you to monitor both your lead and client statuses within one system, so all your files can be in one location and accessible from anywhere. Certain legal case management options will also allow you to view the effectiveness of your intake staff, generate documents, and much more.

These are just a few thoughts to consider as we start the new year. To learn more about lead generation options and case management software, please feel free to contact us at 617.800.0089. We’d love to speak with you.

Best wishes for a happy and prosperous 2016!

¹ Dominican University Study, Dr. Gail Matthews.
²American Bar Association, Lawyer Demographics Table, 2015.
³Forbes, "Lawyers Bump Advertising Spend to $890 Million In Quest For Clients, 2015.
⁴For definitions of these terms, see eGenerationMarketing, "Tips to Increase Your Packet Return Rate," 2015.
⁵The National Law Review, "Legal Marketing Stats Lawyers Need to Know," 2015.

dfm Sun, 01/03/2016 - 16:09

Tips to Increase Your Packet Return Rate

dfm — Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:56:33 +0000

Tips to Increase Your Packet Return Rate

A few months ago, I published a partial transcript of an interview conducted with a lead screener at a national Social Security law firm, which highlighted the importance of prompt and persistent lead follow-ups. However, many attorneys and advocates struggle with converting “desired” claimants (i.e., claimants you would like to sign) to actual signed clients. Regardless of how many high-potential case leads you qualify, you will not witness an increase in signed case inventory, unless you are unable to secure representation documents from the claimants. I have heard from many attorneys and advocates about the challenges of signing cases from Internet leads and wanted to share what steps some of them have taken to overcome these obstacles.

This discussion applies not only to acquiring more disability cases, but also to personal injury cases, workers’ compensation cases, and other case types. To quantify performance with a lead source, we recommend analyzing three principal metrics:

Contact Rate - the percentage of leads you are able to reach
Desired Rate - the percentage of leads you want as clients
Signed Rate - the percentage of leads you sign as actual clients

Some firms may utilize different terminology for these metrics, but the concept is essentially the same. Typically, firms will perform the lead qualification process over the phone and then send the representation documents in the mail. Others will schedule office appointments for the signing of retention documents to establish a face-to-face rapport with the clients. Even if you obtain high contact and desired rates with your leads and believe that a source is performing well, it is crucial to track how many desired claimants complete the signup process, as this will be the true measure of your expected case inventory.

Below are a few tips from attorneys and advocates in our network for securing representation documents more effectively:

Follow Up Persistently

In instances where desired rate is high but signed rate is low, it is usually a product of inadequate follow-up. Without continued follow-up attempts to remind claimants about the importance of returning representation documents, they may lose interest in the process, leading to a failure to return signup forms or to show up for an office appointment.

Some firms that have high packet return rates will follow up every few days for a couple months to continue reminding claimants about the importance of returning the documents. If you rely solely on claimants’ initiative to return the forms, you may be disappointed with your final results.

Create a Sense of Urgency

After qualifying a lead over the phone, you should inform the claimant that certain documents (e.g., SSA-1696, fee agreement, etc.) need to be signed before representation can occur. It is vital to stress that no work can be completed on the case and precious time could be lost (based on filing deadlines or statute of limitations) if the forms are not returned as quickly as possible.

Electronic Signature

Since making contact with claimants is usually the most common obstacle that impedes success with internet leads, utilizing electronic signature can help maximize the percentage of desired claimants you sign. Some companies offer client management software that will send representation documents to the claimants via e-mail and permit them to sign electronically.

Although this may not be considered a valid signature in all jurisdictions for every case type, in scenarios where it is permissible, it could increase your packet return rate significantly. After performing your phone qualification, if you decide to accept a case, you can e-mail the forms while still on the phone with the claimant. This will eliminate the need for future follow-up calls to track down the pending fee agreements.

Other Ideas

Some of our customers have reported other strategies for improving the packet return rate, such as sending packets in a bright-colored envelope or via certified mail so it garners attention in the mailbox and renders it more probable that the claimaint will sign. Others have even reported visiting claimants’ homes to pick up the signed retainers.

Increasing the percentage of claimants who return signup packets will yield more retained clients for your firm. Thus, experimenting with different strategies will help you discover which is most effective. If you have any questions about the tips mentioned in this article or would like to learn more about maximizing your packet return rate, just contact us.

dfm Tue, 09/22/2015 - 12:56

Improving Your Intake Process with Lead Management Software

dfm — Tue, 07 Jul 2015 14:01:23 +0000

Improving Your Intake Process with Lead Management Software

Previous posts on our blog discussed the importance of prompt and persistent follow-up with internet case leads. During my conversations with clients, attorneys and advocates often recognize the importance of a robust follow-up effort, but remain unsure how to implement an actual system to accomplish it. Accordingly, I wanted to focus this post on how certain lead management systems can help you and your staff contact leads at desired intervals, flag high potential prospects, and resolve (i.e., accept or reject) leads more efficiently. This should result in saving time and potentially higher conversion rates on your internet leads.

A Few Words About Software

Of the numerous software options on the market, I have the most familiarity with eGenerationMarketing’s client management software, eLuminate. I will thus concentrate on specific features within eLuminate during this post. However, other software and Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems may offer similar functionality to accomplish the same tasks.

When to Contact

After a contact attempt is made with a particular lead, it is wise schedule a follow-up date to note when you should contact the claimant again. For example, you may have tried to call a lead, but no one answered the phone. This lead could still have a strong case, so you will want to make contact again at a later date.

With eLuminate, you can update the “Next Scheduled Contact” date for your leads and then sort leads by this field. You will then have an organized list of all leads, along with the dates on which they need to be contacted again. This will help ensure that you follow-up with prospects at the proper intervals and that no lead falls through the proverbial cracks.

Flagging High Potentials

Clients often ask me how to flag “high-potential” leads, so they appear on a special follow-up list. You may have spoken to a claimant who has a strong case, but is unsure whether to move forward with a claim. You will want to continue following up with this individual, since the case seems desirable.

In this situation, you can mark the lead has “Qualified” within eLuminate. The lead will then populate a special list of qualified leads. “Qualified” is a designation that denotes a claimant who may not yet have expressed interest in filing a claim with your firm, but has a case that you deem potentially pursuable. You will then have easy access to your highest potential prospects to prioritize your outreach accordingly.

Standardizing the Intake Questionnaire

If multiple staff members call leads, you may consider standardizing your intake questionnaire so that all staff members are qualifying leads in the same manner. You may choose to create a written list of questions to distribute to staff or simply have them rely on memory. However, employing such strategies could create confusion or result in certain questions being omitted or asked out of order.

Some lead management platforms allow you to add custom fields to all of the leads in your account. In eLuminate, you can create a custom field for each question on your intake questionnaire and specify the input type of the custom field (e.g., radio button, text field, date field, select list etc.), depending on the type of data you wish to capture. After the fields are added, you then enter the responses once you speak with lead on the phone, thereby standardizing the order and type of questions asked during the qualification process.

You can also segment and prioritize leads based on data contained within eLuminate custom fields. By creating custom views, you will be able to isolate leads based on case type, medical condition, or any other criteria you specify.

These are just a few of the ways that lead management software can augment your intake process and render it more efficient. You can contact us to learn more about the features described in this post or to schedule a free demo of the eLuminate Client Management Software.

dfm Tue, 07/07/2015 - 10:01

Are You Cut Out for Online Social Security Lead Generation?

dfm — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:11:16 +0000

Are You Cut Out for Online Social Security Lead Generation?

Over the past six years, several hundred attorneys and advocates have utilized our Social Security Disability lead generation service. Many obtain a phenomenal return on investment with the leads, but others sometimes report unsatisfactory results. We constantly strive to improve our lead quality, and from the conversion data reported to us from existing clients, our lead quality has steadily increased over time. Nevertheless, irrespective of lead quality improvement, I still encounter some firms who try our service, but struggle to achieve the desired results.

One of the most rewarding aspects of working at a lead generation company is witnessing a law firm or disability advocacy practice grow both in caseload and profit with the help of internet leads. It is thus all the more troubling when a client reports a negative experience with our SSD leads, since we have seen so many firms across the country who have attained success with these same leads. While I do firmly believe that any attorney or disability advocate can learn to process and to retain internet leads successfully, I have also come to the realization that not all firms possess the know-how to handle disability leads effectively in their current state.

For this reason, I wanted to highlight some of the common hurdles that could impede success with online SSD leads. These obstacles were compiled from conversations with clients and other individuals in the industry. Whether you purchase leads from our company or another, understanding these potential pitfalls before experimenting with online leads can spare you countless headaches and, in some cases, thousands of dollars.

Initial Claims

In my experience, the vast majority of online disability leads involve those who need assistance completing and filing the initial application for benefits. Since such a high percentage of leads involve this stage of the process, an unwillingness to handle these claims will make your chances of obtaining successful results with online leads very slim.

Follow-Up

I dedicated my last post to the importance of lead follow-up. The bottom line is that many of the claimants completing web forms come from adverse circumstances and may not be the most proactive in returning phone calls. Making contact with the leads is hard work, and those who are successful with internet leads will often make 15-20 outbound call attempts before deeming a lead unreachable.

Just as important as lead follow-up is packet follow-up. This refers to following up with the “desired” cases to ensure that the representation documents are returned. After all, you could send retainers to or schedule office appointments for 50% of your leads, but if the retainer agreements are not signed, you will not have any new cases. Claimants may forget about previous conversations with you or lose interest in moving forward, so it is crucial for you or your staff to maintain a persistent follow-up effort to maximize the packet return rate.

Sample Size

Grasping the importance of sample size is crucial for gauging success with internet leads. Flip a coin just five times, and heads may appear on all five instances. Flip a coin 5000 times, and the split will most likely be very close to a 50/50 split between heads and tails.

Similarly, to obtain statistically relevant data with your SSD leads, you should ensure that the sample size is adequate. For example, if you expect to convert about 10% of your leads, a sample size of fewer than 100 leads will often be insufficient to judge lead quality accurately.

You Are Not the Only Option

Tens of thousands of attorneys and disability advocates handle disability cases across the country. Considering this competitive landscape, it is important for you to underscore the benefits of why choosing your firm is the better choice. Understand your unique selling point(s) (e.g., locally-based, experience, win rate, etc.) and convey this to the claimant in an informative and educative manner.

Confusing Conversion Rate with Cost-Per-Case

Sometimes an attorney or advocate will perform quite well with a lead service, but believe or “feel” that the performance was lackluster. For example, you may convert 20% and conclude that it does not make sense to use a pay-per-lead service where 80% of the product is rejected. While this seems straightforward, in the end, the lead cost will determine whether the service in question delivers a suitable return. Assuming a 20% sign rate, a lead price of $1000 per lead would result in a cost per signed case of $5000. However, with a lead price of $10 per lead, it would cost you $50 in marketing dollars to acquire a signed case. As you can imagine, a campaign that delivers a higher conversion rate may not always result in a lower cost per signed case.

The list above may shed some light on important factors to consider when purchasing internet leads. While by no means exhaustive in nature, they can help ensure that you have the proper infrastructure and knowledge base in place before assessing the efficacy of your internet campaigns.

dfm Tue, 02/24/2015 - 11:11

Interview: What One Lead Screener Says About Follow-Up

dfm — Fri, 03 Oct 2014 14:18:23 +0000

Interview: What One Lead Screener Says About Follow-Up

In my last post, I wrote about maximizing lead conversion and briefly outlined five tips that can assist in increasing return-on-investment with an online lead service. The article included recommendations on how to create an efficient follow-up process, based on conversations and feedback from attorneys and advocates who use our service. However, upon reflecting on the content of that post as well as the conversations I have with clients on a near-daily basis, I came to the realization that it could be much more effective to sit down with a client and to report the client’s advice directly.

I thus decided to contact one of our clients, and shortly thereafter we scheduled a brief phone interview to discuss the importance of lead follow-up and how it can affect lead conversion. As we have mentioned countless times in our literature and other posts, the lack of prompt and persistent lead contact will most likely result in low performance on your internet leads. The below text recounts a conversation between me and two individuals from a Social Security law firm, the call center manager and a lead screener. This firm has a successful national practice and an inventory of several thousand cases. In this particular firm, the call center manager is responsible for managing lead distribution and tracking lead performance, while the lead screener calls the leads and, with the assistance of a supervising attorney, identifies which cases merit pursuit. The interview took place on September 23, 2014, and the client graciously agreed to share the content with our readers.¹

Me: Once a lead arrives in your lead management system, how much time elapses before you make the first call?

Lead Screener: Almost right away. We try to be as quick as possible. We usually make the first call within the first couple of minutes and definitely before five minutes have passed.²

Me: What is your follow-up cycle like? How many calls do you make? Do you leave messages or send e-mails? If so, how many?

Lead Screener: So, we’ll make the first call within the first few minutes, like I said before. If the person isn’t there, I’ll leave a voicemail and then call back later the same day. The first week, I’ll leave 3-4 voicemails. After that, I do not leave many voicemails, but I will keep calling at least once a day and sometimes twice if it seems like it could be a good case. I also send out a mass e-mail to all my pending leads once a week.

Call Center Manager: After three weeks, we remove the leads from the screeners’ queue. We’ve found that the resolve rate does not increase enough to keep calling after three weeks.

Me: Wow! That’s a lot of calling. So, you could end up making about 30 calls over the course of three weeks before giving up.

Lead Screener: Yeah.

Me: Some people who use our service will make 1-2 calls and leave one voicemail before giving up on making contact. What would you say to that?

Lead Screener: I wouldn’t advise that. Many of these claimants have a lot of medical and financial issues in their lives, so they will usually not return calls. You have to keep calling until you reach them.

Me: Do you find that the claimants are more receptive to your e-mails or to the actual calls? Do you have any data to show this?

Lead Screener: I don’t have any data, but from my experience, the claimants will reach back to me sometimes through e-mail to let me know that their number has changed or something like that. But, you have to get them on the phone to see if they have a good case.

Me: Do you prioritize the leads you call?

Lead Screener: Yeah. I’ll try to call the ones that seem like they have the best cases first, based on what is written on the form, and then circle back to call the others.

Me: Do you call every lead, regardless of what web form says?

Lead Screener: We call all the leads. Obviously, the ones that seem like better cases will get more attention. But, the case description on the leads is not always accurate, so we call them all back.

Me: That’s good to know. In the end, what percent of the leads do you actually speak with?

Call Center Manager: We typically make contact with 70-75% of the leads.

Me: Many of our clients also ask about how many leads you can realistically expect a staff member to resolve. By “resolve,” I mean to have a conversation with the lead, which would result in the case being either accepted or rejected.

Call Center Manager: We have 15 full-time staff members, in addition to 2 part-time staff members, and their sole responsibility is to call the internet leads. We expect the full-time screeners to resolve about 20 leads per day.

Me: That’s also good to know. Getting back to the actual calling of the leads, clients sometimes ask me how they should introduce themselves on the phone. After all, the claimants fill out the web form on our website, not yours. How do you introduce yourself on the phone?

Lead Screener: Yeah, that’s a good question. I tell them that I am calling about the form they submitted online about their Social Security Disability benefits. A lot these people want to know if they qualify, so I tell them I can conduct a quick five-minute questionnaire, which will tell me whether I think they will be eligible for benefits. I really stress that the questionnaire is quick.

Me: When conducting the questionnaire, how do you know which questions to ask first?

Lead Screener: So I first look for any noticeable holes on the web form. If the form says that the person is not treating with a doctor, I will ask about that. If everything checks out, I then ask the typical stuff like age, work history, etc.

Me: What are some objections you typically face when speaking to claimants on the phone?

Lead Screener: One objection is people not understanding the benefits of having third-party representation. I then let them know how hard the application process is and that the evaluation I give is completely free. I also highlight what we will do for them, such as filing documents and representing them at hearing, and that we don’t get paid unless they are awarded benefits. There will always be some people who just hang up on you. The main thing is to be compassionate, polite, and conversational. Many of these people have a lot of hardship in their lives and are just looking for someone to talk to.

Me: What do you think the most important qualities to look for in a lead screener?

Lead Screener: I would say personability. It’s not too hard to teach someone what to look for in a case, but the person has to know how to converse with the claimants in an informative and compassionate way. Like I said before, many of these people are looking for someone to talk to you, and you have to be able to do that.

I hope this dialogue has underscored the importance of lead follow-up and has shed some light on the skills required to increase your contact rate. A high contact rate represents the first piece required to maximize your return with internet leads. Bear in mind that this is the experience of just one firm. Some firms may not be equipped or desire to perform this level of follow-up. Further, following up in this manner may not guarantee success with internet leads, as there are many other variables involved in determining performance. If you have any questions about this article or would like to talk more about best practices for lead follow-up, please feel free to contact us.

¹The reported interview captures the essence of the conversation that occurred between us. For the sake of brevity and clarity, certain sections may have been paraphrased or otherwise modified. Further, many of the conversational pleasantries have been eliminated to keep the article as succinct and as focused as possible.

²This particular firm performs the lead follow-up in-house and does not utilize a third-party call center. Leads received during weekends are called on the next workday.

dfm Fri, 10/03/2014 - 10:18

dfm's blog

Reconsideration Approval Data by State

2016 Reconsideration Allowance Rate by State1

States with Highest Reconsideration Approval Rates

States with Largest Increase in Reconsideration Approval Rate

Initial Application Approval Data by State

2015 Initial Application Approval Data

States with Largest Increase in Initial Approval Rate

OASDI in America and Abroad

United States (GDP - $18.6 trillion)

China (GDP - $16.5 trillion)

Japan (GDP - $4.4 trillion)

Germany (GDP - $3.5 trillion)

Digesting the SSA's Annual Report on the Disability Insurance Program

Beneficiaries

Beneficiaries by State

Benefit Amounts

Diagnostic Groups

What This Means for Social Security Attorneys

2016 Social Security Changes That You Should Know About

Grow Your Law Practice Efficiently and Profitably in 2016

Tips to Increase Your Packet Return Rate

Improving Your Intake Process with Lead Management Software

A Few Words About Software

When to Contact

Flagging High Potentials

Standardizing the Intake Questionnaire

Are You Cut Out for Online Social Security Lead Generation?

Interview: What One Lead Screener Says About Follow-Up

2016 Reconsideration Allowance Rate by State¹