Bill Overview
Title: Senior Guardianship Social Security Protection Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Social Security Administration (SSA) to establish agreements with each state to share certain information on a monthly basis about the guardianship arrangements of individuals who are entitled to Social Security benefits or Supplemental Security Income (a federal assistance program that provides monthly cash payments to aged, blind, or disabled individuals with limited income and resources). The SSA must also periodically report to Congress about Social Security payments that are diverted to nonfamilial representative payees (i.e., individuals appointed by the SSA to manage payments on behalf of recipients).
Sponsors: Rep. Crist, Charlie [D-FL-13]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals with guardianship arrangements entitled to Social Security or SSI
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The bill targets individuals who are under guardianship arrangements and entitled to Social Security benefits or Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
- Social Security benefits and SSI are primarily targeted at aged, blind, or disabled individuals with limited income and resources.
- Guardianship arrangements can include both familial and nonfamilial representative payees.
Reasoning
- The target population for the policy is approximately 5 million individuals in the US who are under guardianship and receiving Social Security or SSI benefits. This is a significant portion of the 70 million people receiving Social Security benefits, but only a subset of those have guardianship arrangements.
- The budget constraints require a consideration of policy impacts across different demographic groups, including those who may or may not benefit directly from improved oversight of guardianship arrangements.
- It's important to include individuals whom the policy may impact through various representative payees arrangements, both familial and nonfamilial, as well as those who might see no direct impact.
Simulated Interviews
Retired (Florida)
Age: 82 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about how my Social Security is managed by my guardian. Having better oversight might give me some peace of mind.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Disabled Veteran (California)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It’s hard to know if my rep payee is handling my funds correctly. I think this policy will help prevent misuse.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Retired School Teacher (New York)
Age: 73 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I trust my daughter, but this policy gives a little more security knowing there’s oversight.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Unemployed (Illinois)
Age: 45 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it’s reasonable to check how payments are handled, though I don’t think my family would misuse it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Part-Time Worker (Texas)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad to see something will keep nonprofits in check. I’ve heard stories about mishandling.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Factory Worker (Pennsylvania)
Age: 68 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry my grandson isn’t managing my money properly. This might help ensure he doesn’t take advantage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Mechanic (Ohio)
Age: 75 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this will affect us much, since my wife manages our finances, but it’s good to protect people.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired Librarian (Michigan)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hoping this measure will prevent further mismanagement like what I experienced.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Retired Nurse (North Carolina)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Since my guardian isn't family, I'm relieved there will be more accountability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Farmer (Georgia)
Age: 85 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My daughter-in-law handles all my finances well, but it's good to know there's oversight to prevent abuse.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $64000000)
Year 5: $56000000 (Low: $46000000, High: $68000000)
Year 10: $65000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $75000000)
Year 100: $130000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $140000000)
Key Considerations
- The necessity of IT upgrades for managing new data sharing agreements.
- Collaboration with diverse state systems with varying capabilities.
- Potential to substantially reduce fraud and misuse of Social Security benefits over the long term.