National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Summary
Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25964.
×

Introduction

As a result of the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (the Bulletin), 70 FR 2664 (January 14, 2005), the Social Security Administration (SSA) requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convene a committee of experts to conduct a peer review of the Abt Associates’ report titled Synthesizing Information About Vocational Preparation Requirements, Occupational Tasks, and Required Functional Abilities in the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) System. SSA commissioned Abt to develop a report to provide data about occupational requirements for mental functioning, specifically around adaptability and social interaction, in the modern workforce. These data cover a gap in the Occupational Requirements Survey that is being used to create the Occupational Information System, which will replace the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) in SSA’s disability determination processes. These efforts are part of the Vocational Rules Modernization initiative to update SSA’s disability policies in keeping with current medical practice, technological advancements, and the contemporary workforce.

The National Academies committee, which carried out the peer review of the Abt report over the course of four months, included experts from the fields of epidemiology/biostatistics, economics, occupational psychology, and vocational rehabilitation. The committee met three times virtually to evaluate Abt’s methodology and selection of data in accordance with the specific questions posed by SSA in the Statement of Task (see Box I-1). Per the instructions from SSA, the committee evaluated the methodology used by Abt but not its findings or conclusions. During its meetings, the committee focused on providing concrete examples from the Abt report for its answers and ensuring it had a complete picture of Abt’s methodology as described in its report. The committee created a flowchart to help it visualize Abt’s process (see Figure 1), while it reviewed the methods section of the report and relevant appendixes.

Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25964.
×
Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25964.
×
Image
FIGURE 1 A visual depiction of the committee’s understanding of the Abt methodology.

Abt was tasked with relating mental function to essential job tasks within three specific vocational preparation (SVP) ranges for 134 occupations that were identified as priorities by SSA. Occupations were defined as groups of jobs that were aggregated using SOC codes (Abt Associates, 2020, p. 2). Jobs were defined as groups of tasks and work activities that individuals perform for employers in exchange for a wage (Abt Associates, 2020, p. 2). SSA asked Abt to assemble information on the levels of social interaction and adaption required to perform tasks in these occupations for a given SVP range. Abt conducted the project in five phases. Phase 1 comprised an environmental scan to identify the primary data source to be used to identify occupations’ core tasks and inform the ratings. Phases 2–4 involved the expert work group process for creating the occupational requirement ratings. In Phase 5, Abt analyzed all 134 SOC codes to identify commonalities across essential tasks and required functional abilities.

Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25964.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25964.
×
Page3
Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25964.
×
Page4
Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25964.
×
Page5
Suggested Citation:"Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25964.
×
Page6
Next: Review of the Abt Report »
Peer Review of a Report Commissioned by the Social Security Administration on Selected Occupational Requirements Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

At the request of the Social Security Administration (SSA), this publication reviews a commissioned report by Abt Associates on selected occupational requirements. SSA asked Abt to assemble information on the levels of social interaction and adaption required to perform tasks in these occupations for a given specific vocational preparation range. This review examines the suitability of the databases used, the soundness of the methodology used to connect occupational tasks to social interactive and adaptive functional capacities, and the appropriateness of the expertise gathered to perform the analysis.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!