Top 10 Remand Reasons Cited by the AC on Remands of RRs or Own Motion Reviews
Longitudinal report detailing the top 10 reasons for remands cited by the Appeals Council (AC) when returning requests for review (RRs) or own motion review actions to the hearing level offices during each of Fiscal Years 2010 – 2024. The report also contains the percentages of the top 10 reasons as compared to all cited remand reasons during the same years.
Download this dataset in the XML format:
XML| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2010 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 6.3 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 5.1 | Treating Source - Opinion Not identified or Discussed | |
| 4.7 | New Evidence Presented Upon Administrative Appeal / Review | |
| 4.5 | Claimant Credibility - Failed to Discuss Appropriate Credibility Factors | |
| 4.4 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 4.0 | Other | |
| 3.2 | Treating Source - Opinion Rejected Without Adequate Articulation | |
| 2.9 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Other | |
| 2.9 | *RFC - Other | |
| 2.7 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2011 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 8.0 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 4.7 | Treating Source - Opinion Not identified or Discussed | |
| 4.7 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 4.3 | New Evidence Presented Upon Administrative Appeal / Review | |
| 3.8 | Claimant Credibility - Failed to Discuss Appropriate Credibility Factors | |
| 3.1 | Other | |
| 2.9 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 2.9 | Treating Source - Opinion Rejected Without Adequate Articulation | |
| 2.7 | *RFC - Other | |
| 2.6 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Other | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2012 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 9.0 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 5.0 | New Evidence Presented Upon Administrative Appeal / Review | |
| 4.9 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 4.1 | Treating Source - Opinion Not identified or Discussed | |
| 3.4 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 2.9 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Other | |
| 2.8 | *RFC - Manipulative Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 2.8 | Claimant Credibility - Failed to Discuss Appropriate Credibility Factors | |
| 2.6 | Other | |
| 2.6 | Treating Source - Opinion Rejected Without Adequate Articulation | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2013 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 9.4 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 6.3 | New Evidence Presented Upon Administrative Appeal / Review | |
| 4.4 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 3.9 | Treating Source - Opinion Not identified or Discussed | |
| 3.5 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 3.4 | *RFC - Manipulative Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 3.2 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Other | |
| 2.6 | Other | |
| 2.6 | Treating Source - Opinion Rejected Without Adequate Articulation | |
| 2.3 | Claimant Credibility - Failed to Discuss Appropriate Credibility Factors | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2014 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 8.7 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 6.2 | New Evidence Presented Upon Administrative Appeal / Review | |
| 3.9 | Treating Source - Opinion Not identified or Discussed | |
| 3.8 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 3.8 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 2.7 | *RFC - Manipulative Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 2.6 | Consultative Examiner - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 2.4 | Non-Examining Source - Opinion Not Identified or Discussed | |
| 2.4 | Treating Source - Opinion Rejected Without Adequate Articulation | |
| 2.2 | Other | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2015 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 7.6 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 6.2 | New Evidence Presented Upon Administrative Appeal / Review | |
| 3.7 | Treating Source - Opinion Not identified or Discussed | |
| 3.5 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 3.2 | Consultative Examiner - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 3.0 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 2.7 | Non-Examining Source - Opinion Not Identified or Discussed | |
| 2.3 | Non-Examining Source - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 2.3 | Miscellaneous - Other | |
| 2.0 | Treating Source - Opinion Rejected Without Adequate Articulation | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2016 (52 Weeks) ** Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 7.0 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 7.0 | New Evidence Presented Upon Administrative Appeal / Review | |
| 3.0 | Treating Source - Opinion Not Identified or Discussed | |
| 3.0 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 3.2 | Consultative Examiner - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 3.0 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 3.0 | Inadequate Proffer of Post-Hearing Evidence | |
| 2.3 | Other | |
| 2.3 | Non-Examining Source - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 2.0 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Notices Sent to Incorrect Address/Person | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| ** For FY 2016, each of the individual reports have a listing for the normal 52 week fiscal year that ended on 9/23/2016 and a second listing to include the extra 53rd week covering the period from 9/24/2016 – 9/30/2016. Most fiscal years have just 52 weeks, however, FY 2016 had 53 weeks, which is an anomaly that occurs every five or six years. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2016 (53 Weeks) ** Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 7.0 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 7.0 | New Evidence Presented Upon Administrative Appeal / Review | |
| 3.0 | Treating Source - Opinion Not Identified or Discussed | |
| 3.0 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 3.2 | Consultative Examiner - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 3.0 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 3.0 | Inadequate Proffer of Post-Hearing Evidence | |
| 2.3 | Non-Examining Source - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 2.3 | Other | |
| 2.0 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Notices Sent to Incorrect Address/Person | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| ** For FY 2016, each of the individual reports have a listing for the normal 52 week fiscal year that ended on 9/23/2016 and a second listing to include the extra 53rd week covering the period from 9/24/2016 – 9/30/2016. Most fiscal years have just 52 weeks, however, FY 2016 had 53 weeks, which is an anomaly that occurs every five or six years. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2017 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 5.6 | New Evidence Presented to Agency (Reasonable Probability) | |
| 3.7 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 3.5 | Other | |
| 3.3 | Treating Source - Opinion Not identified or Discussed | |
| 2.9 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Notices Sent to Incorrect Address/Person | |
| 2.9 | Consultative Examiner - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 2.8 | Inadequate Proffer of Post-Hearing Evidence | |
| 2.5 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 2.5 | Inadequate Support/Development of Onset Date/Closed Period/CDR | |
| 2.5 | Non-Examining Source - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2018 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 5.0 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 4.0 | Other | |
| 3.0 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Notices Sent to Incorrect Address/Person | |
| 3.0 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 2.6 | Inadequate Proffer of Post-Hearing Evidence | |
| 2.5 | Treating Source - Opinion Not identified or Discussed | |
| 2.4 | Consultative Examiner - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 2.4 | New Evidence Presented to Agency (Reasonable Probability) | |
| 2.3 | Mental Disorder Not Adequately Considered | |
| 2.2 | Non-Examining Source - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2019 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 5.8 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 4.9 | Other | |
| 3.4 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 3.4 | Incomplete / Inaccurate Record - Record Inadequately Developed | |
| 2.7 | New Evidence Presented to Agency (Reasonable Probability) | |
| 2.5 | Consultative Examiner - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 2.4 | Treating Source - Opinion Not Identified or Discussed | |
| 2.3 | Non-Examining Source - Inadequate Support/Rationale for Weight Given Opinion | |
| 2.3 | Failure to Appear Dismissal - Notices Sent to Incorrect Address/Person | |
| 2.2 | Inadequate Proffer of Post-Hearing Evidence | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2020 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 5.7 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 3.8 | SPECIAL CASE PROCESSING | |
| 3.6 | Evidence In The Record Not Considered Or Exhibited | |
| 2.7 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 2.2 | Incomplete / Inaccurate Record - Record Inadequately Developed | |
| 2.1 | Inadequate Proffer of Post-Hearing Evidence | |
| 1.9 | Medical Source Opinion(s) Not Identified or Discussed | |
| 1.9 | VE and DOT Not Reconciled (e.g., sit/stand limitations, time off task, etc.) | |
| 1.8 | Inadequate Rationale for Symptom Evaluation Finding | |
| 1.8 | Other | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2021 Remand Reason |
|
|---|---|---|
| 5.9 | *RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 4.9 | Evidence In The Record Not Considered Or Exhibited | |
| 4.1 | Medical Source Opinion(s) Not Identified or Discussed | |
| 3.2 | Inadequate Rationale for Symptom Evaluation Finding | |
| 2.9 | Inadequate Articulation of Supportability of Medical Source Opinion(s) | |
| 2.8 | *RFC - Exertional Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | |
| 2.5 | Need For Assistive Device Not Adequately Evaluated | |
| 2.1 | Incomplete / Inaccurate Record - Record Inadequately Developed | |
| 2.0 | Inadequate Proffer of Post-Hearing Evidence | |
| 1.6 | VE and DOT Not Reconciled (e.g., sit/stand limitations , time off task, etc.) | |
| * RFC = Residual functional capacity or the most a claimant can do despite his or her limitations or restrictions. | ||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2022 (52 Weeks) * Remand Reason |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| 10.0 | SPECIAL CASE PROCESSING | ||
| 6.0 | Evidence In The Record Not Considered Or Exhibited | ||
| 4.2 | RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | ||
| 3.3 | Inadequate Rationale for Symptom Evaluation Finding | ||
| 3.2 | Medical Source Opinion(s) Not Identified or Discussed | ||
| 2.2 | Need For Assistive Device Not Adequately Evaluated | ||
| 2.1 | Inadequate Articulation of Supportability of Medical Source Opinion(s) | ||
| 1.9 | CDR - Other | ||
| 1.7 | Incomplete / Inaccurate Record - Lost / Inaudible Recording | ||
| 1.7 | New Evidence Presented to Agency (Reasonable Probability) | ||
| * For FY 2022, each of the individual reports have a listing for the normal 52 week fiscal year and a second listing to include the extra 53rd week. Most fiscal years have just 52 weeks, however, some fiscal years have 53 weeks. | |||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2022 (53 Weeks) * Remand Reason |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| 9.9 | SPECIAL CASE PROCESSING | ||
| 6.0 | Evidence In The Record Not Considered Or Exhibited | ||
| 4.2 | RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated | ||
| 3.3 | Inadequate Rationale for Symptom Evaluation Finding | ||
| 3.2 | Medical Source Opinion(s) Not Identified or Discussed | ||
| 2.1 | Need For Assistive Device Not Adequately Evaluated | ||
| 2.1 | Inadequate Articulation of Supportability of Medical Source Opinion(s) | ||
| 1.9 | CDR - Other | ||
| 1.7 | Incomplete / Inaccurate Record - Lost / Inaudible Recording | ||
| 1.7 | New Evidence Presented to Agency (Reasonable Probability) | ||
| * For FY 2022, each of the individual reports have a listing for the normal 52 week fiscal year and a second listing to include the extra 53rd week. Most fiscal years have just 52 weeks, however, some fiscal years have 53 weeks. | |||
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2023 Remand Reason |
|---|---|
| 6.0 | Evidence In The Record Not Considered Or Exhibited |
| 3.8 | RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated |
| 3.5 | Medical Source Opinion(s) Not Identified or Discussed |
| 3.5 | Found Persuasive Without Adequate Articulation |
| 3.3 | Inadequate Rationale for Symptom Evaluation Finding |
| 2.7 | SPECIAL CASE PROCESSING |
| 2.6 | CDR - Other |
| 2.1 | Need For Assistive Device Not Adequately Evaluated |
| 2.1 | Inadequate Articulation of Supportability of Medical Source Opinion(s) |
| 1.9 | New Evidence Presented to Agency (Reasonable Probability) |
| Percent of All Cited Reasons | FY 2024 Remand Reason |
|---|---|
| 7.9 | VE and DOT Not Reconciled (e.g., sit/stand limitations , time off task, etc.) |
| 4.6 | Evidence In The Record Not Considered Or Exhibited |
| 3.8 | Inadequate Articulation of Supportability of Medical Source Opinion(s) |
| 3.5 | SPECIAL CASE PROCESSING |
| 3.5 | Found Persuasive Without Adequate Articulation |
| 3.1 | Medical Source Opinion(s) Not Identified or Discussed |
| 2.5 | RFC - Mental Limitations Inadequately Evaluated |
| 2.5 | Inadequate Rationale for Symptom Evaluation Finding |
| 2.4 | Inadequate Articulation of Consistency of Medical Source Opinion(s) |
| 2.2 | Conflicting VE Evidence Not Reconciled |
Disclaimer: These data are being made publicly available for research purposes. Any findings and conclusions derived from analyses of these data are attributable to the researcher(s) and do not reflect those of the Social Security Administration.