Name: Social Security Disability: Action Needed to Improve Use of Medical Experts at Hearings: Hrd-91-68 (en Inglés)
Price: 496.71 MXN
Availability: InStock
Author: U. S. Government Accountability Office ( ; U. S. Government Accountability Office (
ISBN: 9781289238490

Envío gratis

portada Social Security Disability: Action Needed to Improve Use of Medical Experts at Hearings: Hrd-91-68 (en Inglés)

Formato

Libro Físico

Editorial

Bibliogov

Autor

U. S. Government Accountability Office ( ; U. S. Government Accountability Office (

Idioma

Inglés

N° páginas

Encuadernación

Tapa Blanda

Dimensiones

24.6 x 18.9 x 0.2 cm

Peso

0.07 kg.

ISBN13

9781289238490

Categorías

Política y gobierno

Social Security Disability: Action Needed to Improve Use of Medical Experts at Hearings: Hrd-91-68 (en Inglés)

U. S. Government Accountability Office ( ; U. S. Government Accountability Office ( (Autor) · Bibliogov · Tapa Blanda

Libro Nuevo

$ 496.71

$ 827.85

Ahorras: $ 331.14

40% descuento

Envío normal

Origen: Estados Unidos (Costos de importación incluídos en el precio)

Se enviará desde nuestra bodega entre el Viernes 26 de Julio y el Lunes 05 de Agosto.

Lo recibirás en cualquier lugar de México entre 1 y 3 días hábiles luego del envío.

Reseña del libro "Social Security Disability: Action Needed to Improve Use of Medical Experts at Hearings: Hrd-91-68 (en Inglés)"

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Social Security Administration's Office of Hearings and Appeals' (OHA) use and selection of medical experts (ME) to provide testimony or evidence for disability hearings and cases. GAO found that: (1) OHA policy required the selection of such experts on a rotational basis by medical specialty, when possible; (2) when purchasing expert testimony, OHA did not ensure compliance with either its rotation policy or federal procurement policy; (3) medical experts were consulted in approximately 12 percent of all OHA hearings; (4) OHA lacked adequate controls at the hearing office level to ensure the fair selection of experts; (5) some administrative law judges requested medical experts by name; (6) repeated use of individual experts led to questions regarding the fairness of the hearings; and (7) in Chicago, recruitment efforts were insufficient to ensure the availability of more than one expert in high-demand medical specialties.