Posts Tagged ‘geo:lat=43.6187102’
As any good disability lawyer will tell you, there are some conditions that are more difficult to get on disability for than others. One of those conditions is Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or CFS. This is primarily because CFS seems to be a diagnosis that is used to describe a loosely related set of symptoms that can not be explained by any other means, the primary symptom of which is fatigue. If you have been told by your doctor that you have CFS, contact a Boise disability lawyer in our Boise, Idaho office today to get more information on how you can prepare your case to successfully apply for Social Security Disability Benefits.
In 2014, Social Security released SSR 14-1p entitled “Evaluating Claims Involving Chronic Fatigue Syndrome” to help claimants and their attorneys to better understand how CFS fits into Social Security’s set of medically determinable impairments. SSR 14-1p replaced SSR 99-2p, which was published in 1999 and first established how Social Security would deal with claims of Chronic Fatigue.
One of the key concepts in Social Security Disability that a disability lawyer must make sure every claim has is a medically determinable impairment or “MDI”. Certain conditions such as chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia are a set of symptoms that can’t otherwise be explained, which makes them difficult to diagnose, except by eliminating other sources of the symptoms. SSR 14-1p helps establish when chronic fatigue can be established as an MDI.
In general, SSR 14-1p defines Chronic Fatigue as a clinically evaluated, persistent or relapsing chronic fatigue that :
- Has a specific onset
- Is not explained by another identifiable condition or illness
- Is not related to exertion
- Is not alleviated by rest
- Results in a significant reduction in your ability to perform important occupational, social or personal activities.
Diagnostic Symptoms: Social Security points to the CDC case definition of Chronic Fatigue states that a person must have four or more of the following specific symptoms for 6 or more months:
- Tiredness after exerting yourself that lasts for 24 hours or more
- Difficulty with memory and concentration
- Soar Throat
- Tender lymph nodes in your neck
- Muscle Pain
- Waking unrefreshed
- Muscle weakness
- Problems sleeping
- Visual difficulties
- Fainting, dizziness or fatigue with prolonged standing
- Difficulty breathing
- Cardiovascular abnormalities
- Stomach Problems
There are also certain conditions that people with Chronic Fatigue also commonly suffer from, including:
- Myofascial pain syndrome
- Temporomandibular joint syndrome
- Irritable Bowell Syndrome
- Interstitial systitis
- Raynauds phenomenon
- Chronic Lymphocitic Thyroiditis
- Sjogren’s syndrome
- New allergies or sensitivities (cold all the time)
Disability lawyers know that Social Security will not simply take your doctor at his word that you have Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. You will need a good Social Security attorney to help Social Security to find evidence of the above signs and conditions and show if you have other conditions that may be causing these signs and conditions. Social Security will require medical signs or laboratory findings that support your diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue before they will consider that it constitutes an MDI.
Medical Signs—Social Security will look for one or more of the following medical signs that last longer than 6 months:
- Swollen or tender lymph nodes on physical examination
- Sore throat (nonexudative)
- Tender Points
- Other, less persuasive, signs such as Frequent viral infections, Sinusitis, Ataxia, Extreme pallor, Pronounced weight change
Laboratory Findings—Your Disability Attorney should point out the following to Social Security to indicate your diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue is legitimate:
- An elevated antibody titer to Epstein-Barr virus capsid antigen equal to ore greater than 1:5120, or early antigen equal to or greater than 1:640
- Abnormal MRI of the brain
- Abnormal exercise stress test
- Abnormal sleep studies
In addition to those discussed above, your disability lawyer may be able to point to other medical signs and laboratory findings that Social Security may accept in deciding your Chronic Fatigue diagnosis constitutes an MDI. The key is that your doctor explains carefully what medical sings and laboratory findings he has considered in making his diagnosis. A diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue will be much stronger the more conditions that have been ruled out as possible causes for your signs and symptoms.
Contact our Boise disability lawyers today for a free case evaluation and find out if you meet the criteria for Social Security Disability.
A Few More Thoughts On Unemployment
If you are receiving unemployment compensation benefits, can you still receive Social Security disability benefits? The answer to this question is quite complex, and if you are receiving unemployment you should consult a Social Security attorney with our office. You can receive benefits from both programs, but it can be tricky. As a general rule, our disability attorneys strongly discourage applying for unemployment benefits while applying for disability benefits.
The problem is that you are saying two different things when you apply for both Social Security disability and unemployment compensation benefits. You are telling one government program that you are able and willing to work and the other that you are so handicapped either mentally or physically that you can no longer work. So while Social Security guidelines to not provide a bright line prohibition against granting disability benefits to someone on unemployment, most judges will see it as a question of credibility and it can be very damaging to your case—as every disability attorney will tell you, credibility is everything when it comes to applying for Social Security disability.
The first thing to consider is your onset date. If you claim that you are disabled the date you were laid off from work, you must also consider that this is probably also the date you started telling the unemployment compensation people that you are ready and willing to work. You should consult with your attorney about moving the onset date forward to avoid this conflict. However, before you do this you should understand that the judges that will be determining the outcome of your case have very different views about the people who receive unemployment compensation benefits during the time that they are also claiming to be disabled. If possible, you should try to find out what your judge’s view on the matter is, which is only possible if you are using a local Social Security attorney who knows the local judges.
Also keep in mind that there are some cases where there is no conflict and moving your onset date is unnecessary. This kind of case usually occurs with claimants can not do their past relevant work and legitimately receive unemployment compensation because they are willing to try something new. This will usually occur for claimants fifty years old or older who can also be found disabled using rules from the Medical-Vocational guidelines. However, some states claim that a limitation to sedentary work does not qualify a claimant for unemployment compensation benefits because there is a requirement that the claimant be capable of performing more jobs than just sedentary ones.
Your attorney might also argue that you would have attempted to work if you found a job during the time you were receiving unemployment compensations benefits, but you would not have been able to sustain the work. This makes the unemployment compensation benefits legitimate but also provides a basis for the disability claim. If you are unsure whether or not your unemployment compensation benefits are going to be a problem, please contact one of our Social Security attorneys.
As mentioned earlier, administrative law judges vary in their views. There is no regulation or ruling that says you cannot receive unemployment benefits and still get Social Security benefits. However, some judges might think of this as double dipping and will not find you disabled during the time that you received unemployment compensation. This could be the case even if you present a legitimate claim that you can
receive both benefits. The judge may ask you to move the onset date to when you last received unemployment compensation benefits, but he may also expect you to move the onset date based on your medical condition worsening and not based on when your benefits stopped. Both could mean a significant loss of back benefits. For other judges, it isn’t a big deal that you are receiving benefits from both programs.
Another thing to keep in mind is that an application for unemployment benefits will be considered together with all of your other medical evidence. Lots of the time, underlying circumstances will be more important than the fact that you applied for unemployment benefits. If you are clearly severely disabled and have significant objective evidence of your disability, a judge may decide to overlook your unemployment compensation.
For help with your disability claim, you can contact one of our Social Security attorneys. They can help you correctly place your onset date and put together the best possible case. For a few more thoughts on unemployment benefits and applying for disability, see Unemployment And Disability.
Originally posted 2015-02-02 16:50:05.
Subsidized Work Environments
Substantial Gainful Activity and Subsidized Work Environments
If you are able to perform substantial gainful activity Social Security may find you physically disabled according to their rules, but you will not be able to collect Social Security Disability benefits. One of the components of substantial gainful activity is the ability to earn over approximately $1040/month (this amount increases ever year. Consult with one of our Disability Attorneys Boise for the current number). If you are earning over this amount, but feel you are still disabled, you should speak with one of our disability attorneys in Boise to see if subsidies or special conditions may be used by Social Security to reduce the amount of income they count in calculating your gross monthly pay. A disability attorney can help you identify these and determine if you should apply for disability benefits in spite of the fact that you are otherwise making too much each month.
Subsidies and Special Conditions
You may be receiving special supports or accommodations from your employer because of your disability, which can count towards reducing the amount you earn. If you are receiving special support, or if you are making less than your coworker, you should speak with our attorneys to see there are sufficient reasons to reduce your earnings to less than $1040/month. You may have a subsidy from your employer if:
- You receive special supervision or oversight (more than what other workers receive who are doing your same job)
- You are required to do fewer or simpler tasks that those who are doing the same job for the same pay
- You have a job coach or special mentor who does work that others in your position would do themselves
- You are allowed extra time to perform your duties
- Your employer provides you with an adjusted work schedule—allows you to go home early and work fewer days.
With the help of your Social Security disability attorney, you can calculate the value of any subsidies that you are receiving and subtract them from your monthly gross income. If this new adjusted monthly gross income is less than $1040, you may then qualify for disability even though you are making more than what would otherwise be allowed.
The basic theory behind allowing you to make more money and still qualify for disability is this: the income component of substantial gainful activity is meant to capture your ability to work—in other words, what your earning capacity is. The subsidies your employer provides to you are essentially gifts to you. In other words, you are not actually earning the money that you are being paid. For example, if you are a salaried employee and are paid based on a 40 hour week, but you only end up working 25 hours a week, you have a 15 hour/week subsidy. If you are then receiving $1500/month in salary, we would divide that $1500 by the 160 hours a month you are supposed to be working and then multiply it by the 100 hours that you are actually working and come up with your unsubsidized earnings. In this example, that would be $938/month, which would allow you to qualify for Social Security Disability benefits.
If you have a job for a family member where they pay you to “watch the phones” or to “hold down the fort” or if you are in the military and are receiving full pay in spite of the fact that you are not performing your duties or are only performing some of your duties, you should contact one of our Social Security disability attorneys in Boise today to find out if you should apply for disability. A good attorney will provide you with important guidance that will help you to avoid some of the common mistakes made by those who apply for Social Security disability without the help a disability lawyer.
Originally posted 2014-11-19 17:32:05.
This article discuses the consultative examination. Your Boise Social Security Attorney can help you understand how this examination affects your disability application and its interplay with your own doctors records and statements. If you have questions about your consultative examination, contact a Social Security Attorney in our Boise Idaho office.
It is not uncommon for Social Security to send you to one of their doctors if they feel you do not have sufficient medical records to determine the extent of your limitations. This is called a consultative examination. But sometimes Social Security will seek to send you to one of their doctors for no apparent reason other than as an attempt to create substantial evidence to justify denying a claim for disability benefits. If this is the case, your disability lawyer should object to this consultative examination. This is also a reason to choose a local Social Security attorney who is familiar with which doctors tend to be unfair in their reporting of claimant’s symptoms. Social Security should not request a consultative examination until “every reasonable effort” has been made to obtain evidence from the claimant’s own medical sources.
…we will make an initial request for evidence from your medical source and, at any time between 10 and 20 calendar days after the initial request, if the evidence has not been received, we will make one follow-up request to obtain the medical evidence necessary to make a determination. The medical source will have a minimum of 10 calendar days from the date of our follow-up request to reply, unless our experience with that source indicates that a longer period is advisable in a particular case. (20 C.F.R. ßß 404.1512 (d)(1)).
If you have a treating physician, your Social Security disability attorney may want to ask that this doctor be used by Social Security for your consultative examination. Your own doctors are generally supposed to be Social Security’s preferred source for disability examinations. (20 C.F.R. ßß 404.1519h). So if a consultative examination is required, after every reasonable effort has been made to obtain from your doctors the needed information your disability lawyer should insist that Social Security send you to one of your own doctors, provided that doctor is willing and able to provide such an examination. Social Security may deny your request for examination by one of your doctors if they know from prior experience that your doctor is not be a productive source, e.g., he or she has consistently failed to provide complete or timely reports. If the agency states that your doctor is not an acceptable source for an examination, your disability lawyers should demand proof. (20 C.F.R. ßß 404.1519i)
If your Social Security Attorney is not able to get Social Security to send you to one of your own doctors for an examination, they should object to any doctor that they have reason to believe does not provide adequate examinations. Your disability attorney can object to a consultative examination for the following reasons:
(1) If the medical source Social Secuirty designated had previously represented an interest adverse to you. For example, the medical source may have represented your employer in a workers’ compensation case.
(2) The presence of a language barrier.
(3) The medical source’s office location (e.g., 2nd floor, no elevator).
(4) Travel restrictions.
(5) The medical source had examined you in connection with a previous disability determination or decision that was unfavorable to you.
(6) If your objection is that a medical source allegedly lacks objectivity in general, but not in relation to you personally, we will review the allegations. See 20 C.F.R ß 404.1519s.
To avoid a delay in processing your claim, the consultative examination in your case will be changed to another medical source while a review is being conducted. (20 C.F.R. ßß 404.1519j)
If SSA refuses to change your examination and asserts that the agency had previously conducted such a review and found that the reports of the medical source in question conformed to agency guidelines, your disability lawyer may want to file a FOIA request to ascertain the validity of the review.
If there is any conflict in the evidence in the record, Social Security must first contact and then re-contact the medical sources responsible for creating the conflicts and ambiguities. SSA may not first resolve those conflicts and ambiguities by engaging a third party expert to create his or her own additional conflicts.
Be sure to ask a Boise Social Security Attorney in our office about getting a medical source statement to your doctors.
Originally posted 2014-09-12 23:57:26.
This the is the fourth part of an article entitled Medical Source Statements, which discusses how your Boise Social Security Attorney can use statements from your doctors get you your disability benefits. You may read this article from the beginning, starting with “Medical Source Statements — Part I”. You may also want to contact a Social Security Attorney in our Boise Idaho office.
This article covers SSR 96-2p, which is entitled “Giving Controlling Weight to Treating Source Medical Opinions” and provides your Boise Social Security attorney with the criteria judges must use to evaluate the opinions of your doctors.
If the opinion of your doctor is entitled to controlling weight, the ALJ must use the limitations your doctor provides in determining your disability. Not all opinions from your doctor are entitled to controlling weight and not every treatment provider qualifies to provide a controlling weight opinion. In order to be entitled to controlling weight,
1. The opinion must come from a treating source;
2. The opinion must be a medical opinion;
3. The adjudicator must find that the treating source’s medical opinion is well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques; and
4. The treating source’s medical opinion must be not inconsistent with the other substantial evidence in the individual’s case record.
Number four above should make it clear to you that having a Social Security attorney at the initial levels of application is very important. Many of the forms that Social Security disability claimants are asked to complete require details of your daily activities. There are many common mistakes that claimants are prone to making that miscommunicate their actual abilities. In order to effectively communicate your disability to Social Security, make sure you get advice for an experienced Boise Social Security attorney on completing function reports, work history reports and other forms sent to you by Social Security. By correctly completing these forms, it is more likely that your doctor’s opinions will be found not inconsistent with the record.
In addition, if you suffer from both mental and physical impairments, it is important that your Social Security disability lawyer distinguish between the opinions of your doctors, which should take into account both your physical and mental limitations, and the opinions of Social Security doctors, which frequently only account for either physical or mental limitations, but not both. Your disability must be evaluated in light of ALL of your conditions/limitations and it is improper to say that a medical opinion or other evidence that conflicts with your doctor’s opinion is inconsistent with it unless it takes into account all of the same conditions that your doctor’s opinion does.
Ruling 06-03p has significantly increased the value of nonmedical evidence, including the testimony of lay persons such as your family members, friends, chiropractors, clergy etc., so it is important that none of this testimony conflict with the opinion of your doctor. Be sure to send such letters to your disability attorney and do not submit them directly to Social Security.
You judge may need to consult a medical expert to gain more insight into what the clinical signs and laboratory findings signify in order to decide whether a medical opinion is well-supported or whether it is not inconsistent with other substantial evidence in the case record. Your disability lawyer may seek clarification from your doctors if your doctor is willing to produce it.
Controlling Weight Versus Greatest Weight
If a judge finds that your doctors’ opinions are not entitled to controlling weight, that does not mean he or she does not have to take them into account. SSR 96-2p indicates that even though your treating source’s medical opinion may not be entitled to controlling weight, it may, nevertheless, be entitled to the greatest weight of any opinion in the record and should be adopted. SSR 96-2p states as follows:
“Adjudicators must remember that a finding that a treating source medical opinion is not well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques or is inconsistent with the other substantial evidence in the case record means only that the opinion is not entitled to controlling weight, not that the opinion should be rejected. Treating source medical opinions are still entitled to deference and must be weighed using all of the factors provided in 20 C.F.R. ßß 404.1527 and 416.927. In many cases, a treating source’s medical opinion will be entitled to the greatest weight and should be adopted, even if it does not meet the test for controlling weight.”
The Court of Appeals has pointed out the differences between controlling weight, some deference, and no weight:
“The initial determination the ALJ must make with respect to a treating physician’s medical opinion is whether it is conclusive, i.e., is to be accorded controlling weight on the matter to which it relates . . .. But finding such deficiencies to resolve the controlling-weight question against a claimant does not end the inquiry. Even if a treating opinion is not given controlling weight, it is still entitled to deference; at the second step in the analysis, the ALJ must make clear how much weight the opinion is being given (including whether it is being rejected outright) and give good reasons, tied to the factors specified in the cited regulations for this particular purpose, for the weight assigned.
Thus, a deficiency as to the conditions for controlling weight raises the question of how much weight to give the opinion; it does not resolve the latter, distinct inquiry. This second inquiry is governed by its own set of factors, summarized as follows: (1) the length of the treatment relationship and the frequency of examination; (2) the nature and extent of the treatment relationship, including the treatment provided and the kind of examination or testing performed; (3) the degree to which the physician’s opinion is supported by relevant evidence; (4) consistency between the opinion and the record as a whole; (5) whether or not the physician is a specialist in the area upon which an opinion is rendered; and (6) other factors brought to the ALJ’s attention which tend to support or contradict the opinion. In applying these factors, the ALJ’s findings must be sufficiently specific to make clear to any subsequent reviewers the weight [he] gave to the treating source’s medical opinion and the reason for that weight. (Krauser v. Astrue, 638 F.3d 1324, 1330-1331 (10th Cir. 2011))“
Be sure to ask a Boise Social Security Attorney in our office about getting a medical source statement to your doctors. To continue with this article, please click the link below.
Click To Next Page
Originally posted 2014-09-05 18:06:30.
The article is the second in the series of articles covering Social Security’s Process Unification Rulings—for more information, contact a Boise Disability Attorney in our office. These are rulings that provide more concrete standards for evaluating your disability claim and contain information you should be familiar with. This article covers SSR 96-2p, which is entitled “Giving Controlling Weight to Treating Source Medical Opinions” and provides your disability attorney with the criteria judges must use to evaluate the opinions of your doctors.
This article should better help you to understand the importance of your medical records and that they contain detail regarding your physical limitations, especially as to sitting, lifting, standing, carrying, fingering and handling that can support your doctors medical opinion regarding your limitations. These are important limitations for any disability claimant to communicate to their doctors.
Over time, Social Security judges developed what became known as the ‘treating physician rule’. Under this rule, your attorney will argue that the judge should give more weight to medical opinions from treating sources than those from non-treating sources. If you would like more information, you can look this law up online at 20 C.F.R. ß 404.1527, and in SSR 96-2p itself. Social Security Ruling 96-2p is significant because it forces judges to take your doctor’s medical opinions seriously. Your attorney should make sure that the judge gives proper respect to your doctor’s opinions.
So it is important that your doctor be willing to provide you with their opinion about your limitations and include your limitations in their notes. Your attorney will send this form to your doctor at the appropriate time. In the meantime, you should keep a journal in between your doctor visits of how you struggle with simple daily activities. Review this journal before each appointment, and then provide your doctor with examples from your everyday life that illustrate your disability, especially concerning your ability to finger, handle, lift, carry, sit, stand and walk. But it is best that you don’t discuss your disability claim with your doctor.
When A Treating Source Statement Is Entitled to Controlling Weight.
If your doctor’s medical opinion is entitled to controlling weight, then the judge must accept the limitations your doctor provides. Otherwise, the judge assigns some lesser weight to the opinion and may or may not accept the limitations as indicated by your doctor. To be given controlling weight, the opinion must (1) come from one of your regular doctors who is a medically acceptable source, (2) be a medical opinion, (3) be well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques, and (4) not be inconsistent with other substantial evidence in the record. If you have questions about these factors, ask your disability attorney.
Medical opinions are statements from physicians and psychologists or other acceptable medical sources that reflect judgments about the nature and severity of your impairment(s), including your symptoms, diagnosis and prognosis, what you can still do despite impairment(s), and your physical or mental restrictions (20 C.F.R. ßß 404.1527(a)(2)).
To ensure that there is a sound medical basis for your doctor’s opinion, Social Security requires that the opinion be well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques. Your disability attorney should make sure the judge sees these. Medically acceptable means that the clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques that the medical source uses comply with the medical standards that are generally accepted within the medical community as the appropriate techniques to establish the existence and severity of your impairment.
To be well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques does not mean that the opinion must be fully supported. Just because there is some conflicting results in the record will not mean that the medical opinion is not well-supported. But this is a somewhat subjective, and open to the reasonable interpretation of the evidence by the judge. Your disability attorney will help the judge to see all of the evidence that supports your doctor’s opinions.
“Not inconsistent” is a term used to indicate that a well-supported treating source medical opinion need not be supported directly by all of the other evidence (i.e., it does not have to be consistent with all the other evidence) as long as there is no other substantial evidence in the case record that contradicts or conflicts with the opinion. “Not inconsistent with” has a slightly different meaning than “consistent with” because it requires the judge to search the record for inconsistent evidence in order to give the treating source’s opinion less than controlling weight, and not that the opinion only has controlling weight if the record supports it. See Dominguese v. Massanari, 172 F. Supp. 2d 1087 (E. D. Wis. 2001).
Originally posted 2014-05-30 13:30:42.
In 1996, Social Security came out with several rulings that were designed to produce more uniform decisions across the nation. The Process Unification Rulings have helped many claimants because they have given your Boise disability attorney specific standards for determining the effect of physical limitations. Because they are typically so clear and so straightforward in their mandates, it is hard for Social Security decision makers to ignore these disability rulings.
The following rulings are the primary components of this unification process:
SSR 96-1p–Application by the Social Security Administration (SSA) of Federal Circuit Court and District Court Decisions.
- SSR 96-2p–Giving Controlling Weight to Treating Source Medical Opinions
- SSR 96-3p–Considering Allegations of Pain and Other Symptoms in Determining Whether a Medically Determinable Impairment Is Severe
- SSR 96-4p–Symptoms, Medically Determinable Physical and Mental Impairments, and Exertional and Nonexertional Limitations
- SSR 96-5p–Medical Source Opinions on Issues Reserved to the Commissioner
- SSR 96-6p–Consideration of Administrative Findings of Fact by State Agency Medical and Psychological Consultants and Other Program Physicians and Psychologists at the Administrative Law Judge and Appeals Council Levels of Administrative Review; Medical Equivalence
- SSR 96-7p–Evaluation of Symptoms in Disability Claims: Assessing the Credibility of an Individual’s Statements
- SSR 96-8p–Assessing Residual Functional Capacity in Initial Claims
- SSR 96-9p–Determining Capability to Do Other Work–Implications of a Residual Functional Capacity for Less Than a Full Range of Sedentary Work
In subsequent articles, we will go over each of these rulings and what they mean to your Social Security disability application. You attorney can also help answer any questions you may have.
The first ruling, SSR 96-1p, is a fairly technical ruling, which your disability attorney will appreciate, but may not mean a great deal to you. SSR 96-1p states how Social Security decision makers are do take into account interpretations of law and policy by federal court decisions. Essentially, SSR 96-1p simply reaffirms Social Securities’ longstanding disability policy that unless a Social Security Acquiescence Ruling (AR) is issued stating the conflict between federal circuit court holdings and Social Security’s interpretation of the Social Security Act or regulations, Social Security decision makers must continue to follow Social Security’s nationwide policies when deciding cases and not the court holding.
SSA acquiesces only in decisions of the Federal circuit courts, and not in decisions of Federal district courts within a circuit. This policy is set forth in 20 C.F.R. 404.985 and 416.1485. There is a common misconception about these code sections and about SSR 96-1p. Some disability attorneys and a surprising number of judges think that nonacquiecense applies to all court cases for which the agency has not issued an AR. A disability attorney or adjudicator may believe that disability decision makers can not apply the holding in any court decision which is not accompanied by an AR.
This is incorrect. If there is no conflict between SSA policy and precedent, SSA considers itself bound to follow court precedent. In practice, your disability attorney should point out that absent a statement from SSA that a district holding conflicts with SSA’s nationwide policy (unless a conflict is obvious from the holding), the absence of a conflict should be presumed.
Articles on the remaining 96’ rulings will be added to our website as they become available. Please contact our office and speak with a Boise disability attorney if you have any questions.
Originally posted 2014-03-15 21:13:18.
We know that you have limited resources as you make your way through the Social Security Disability application process. Listed below are some resources that may assist you in finding low-cost housing opportunities to help you through this difficult time. If you find additional resources or have feedback on the resources we have listed, please inform us by calling 208-957-6966.
Idaho Navigators-Health and Welfare Housing Assistance
Call: Idaho Careline 211
Idaho Housing Hotline
Nampa Housing Authority
1703 3rd St. N.
Nampa, ID 83687
Caldwell Housing Authority
22730 Farmway Rd.
Caldwell, ID 83607
Boise City Ada Housing Authority
1276 W. River St., Suite 300
Boise, Idaho 83702
Idaho Housing and Finance Association- Rental Assistance Boise
565 W. Myrtle
P.O. Box 7899
Boise, ID 83707
Jesse Tree of Idaho-Emergency Rent and Mercy Assistant Program
1025 S. Capitol Blvd.
Boise, ID 83706
Idaho Housing and Finance Association-Rental Assistance Twin Falls
844 N. Washington
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Twin Falls Housing Authority
200 Elm St. N.
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Pocatello Housing Authority
711 N. 6th Ave.
Pocatello, ID 83201
Idaho Housing and Finance Association-Rental Assistance-Lewiston
215 10th St., Suite 101
P.O. Box 342
Lewiston, ID 83501
Idaho Housing and Finance Association Rental Assistance-Idaho Falls
390 W. Sunnyside Rd.
Idaho Falls, ID 83402
Eastern Idaho Community Action Partnership
357 Constitution Way
Idaho Falls, ID
Originally posted 2014-02-17 15:56:32.
The following are locations where you may be able to receive low-cost medical assistance. Keep in mind that you may not be able to see a doctor at these locations as your primary care provider may be a physicians assistant. If possible, ask to see a medical doctor every 3 months. Social Security places much greater weight on the opinions of medical doctors. For more information on why you need to see a medical doctor, see our post on Acceptable Medical Sources.
Idaho Navigators-Health and Welfare
Call: Idaho Careline 211
Terry Reilley Health Services- Nampa
223 16th Ave. N.
Nampa, ID 83653
Terry Reilley Health Services- Caldwell
2005 Arlington St.
Terry Reilley Health Services- Boise
848 La Cassia
Boise, ID 83705
704 S. Latah St.
Boise, ID 83705
Sunshine Family Health Clinic
2308 N. Cole Rd. #H
Boise, ID 83704
Garden City Community Clinic
215 W. 35th St.
Boise, ID 83714
Mustard Seed Wellness Clinic
676 Shoup Ave.W., Suite 2
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Family Health Services-Twin Falls
388 Martin St.
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Terry Reilley Health Services- Marsing
201 Main St.
Marsing, ID 83639
Terry Reilley Health Services-Homedale
108 E. Idaho Ave. #1058
Homedale, ID 83628
Health West Clinic-Pocatello
845 W. Center St. #200
Pocatello, ID 83204
Pocatello Free Clinic
429 Washington Ave.
Pocatello, ID 83201
Community Family Clinic
2088 E. 25th St.
Idaho Falls, ID 83404
Family Health Services-Burley
1308 Bennett Ave.
Burley, ID 83318
Family Health Services-Jerome
133 W. Avenue A, Suite B
Jerome, ID 83338
Family Health Services-Buhl
725 Fair St.
Buhl, ID 83316
Family Health Services-Rupert
1024 8th St.
Rupert, ID 83350
Originally posted 2014-02-17 15:26:36.