Free · From our NOSSCR Fall 2026 talk

Know your numbers
with data you already have

Status reports, the eFolder, AARPS and SSA’s public files can tell you how busy you will be and what it will be worth. Start with one number this week, then build the full forecast.

Get the handout Get the forecast prompt

Start here

Pick one number to know by next Friday

Each starter uses one source, needs no vendor and gives you a number you can check before you build the full forecast.

Chart your open cases by age

You need

Your status-report exports: initial/recon and hearing.

Do this

1. Save each export with its date. Don’t overwrite last month’s.
2. Add an age column: today minus the date the case entered its current stage. Use the stage date, not the export date.
3. Count cases in 30-day buckets, one chart per stage.

You learn

Where your backlog sits, and which cases are older than SSA’s published average for their stage.

Look up your hearing offices’ waits

You need

SSA’s monthly hearing office report (NetStat). It’s free. Open the report

Do this

1. List the hearing offices your cases sit in, by office code.
2. Note each office’s average months, request to hearing held, and the report month.
3. Add those months to each pending request date.

You learn

Roughly when today’s hearing requests come due. It’s an average for closed cases, not a date for one case.

Work out your realized average fee

You need

The AARPS fee payment history (it exports to Excel) and your list of favorable decisions.

Do this

1. Pick favorable decisions old enough for the fee to have arrived.
2. Total every payment for each of those cases.
3. Divide by the number of favorable cases, counting the ones that paid $0. Do it by stage.

You learn

What a win is actually worth at each stage. The forecast needs this number.

The forecast

Hearing workload and fee cash from the cases you already have

The same five steps from the talk, two ways: a prompt for an AI tool, and a workbook with every formula visible. Both start from 100 synthetic cases, so you can check the method before you trust it with your own.

Use an AI tool that runs code

It needs to calculate on the files you attach. If it can’t run code, it should say so and stop.

Test it on the sample files

Attach both sample CSVs with the prompt. The totals should match section 8 exactly.

Swap in your own data

Same columns, case IDs instead of names. Replace every “illustrative” assumption with your firm’s.

The forecast prompt

Paste it with the two CSVs attached. Section 8 holds the answers for the sample files.

Read the full prompt

You are preparing a transparent planning scenario for a disability practice's **existing open caseload**. Calculate expected future hearing workload and net representative-fee receipts from INITIAL, RECON and HEARING cases. Begin the worked example with an INITIAL case and include every mutually exclusive award path. Use the exact rules below and identify any missing input before forecasting the affected records.

### 1. Freeze scope and inputs

Use the supplied fixed AS_OF on the first day of a month. Do not replace it with today or the latest observed row date. The teaching example is AS_OF = 2026-10-01. Display 24 months, October 2026 through September 2028; the exclusive horizon end is 2028-10-01. Keep beyond-horizon hearings and fee cash separately.

Model only currently open INITIAL, RECON and HEARING cases. Exclude and report future intake, Appeals Council/court/remands, hearings already held, cases awaiting a decision after hearing, and awarded-but-unpaid receivables. A HEARING row means the hearing is still in the future. Do not relabel an already-held case as a future hearing to obtain cash.

This output is not a whole-firm cash forecast. It excludes opening cash, opening receivables, other receipts, future intake and all expenses. Do not claim that its fee totals establish hiring or payroll affordability.

**Current-case schema, one row per case:**

| Field | Exact meaning |
|---|---|
| case_id | Nonblank stable pseudonymous ID; unique after normalization |
| observed_as_of | Date this row was observed; no later than AS_OF |
| stage | Exactly INITIAL, RECON or HEARING |
| stage_start | Actual application filing date, recon filing date, or hearing request date, according to current stage |
| hearing_office_code | Exact SSA office code, stored as text; unique match in office table |
| scheduled_hearing | Optional actual future hearing date; allowed only for HEARING |
| reviewed_current_event | Optional future reviewed scenario date for the current-stage resolution endpoint or hearing; AS_OF or later |
| notes | Optional non-identifying context |

Dates are real dates in Excel or ISO YYYY-MM-DD in CSV. Empty optional fields stay empty. Across monthly exports, group by stable case_id and retain the latest observed_as_of at or before AS_OF. Resolve conflicting equal-date records manually; never choose an arbitrary first row. Do not sum repeated snapshots as separate cases. An observation date is not a stage-start event date. Do not infer that the latest stage was reached on its first observed date.

Reject and count rows with missing ID, duplicate ID, unknown stage, invalid/future observation date, missing/future stage start, unknown/duplicate office code, invalid schedule, invalid reviewed date, or an unreviewed scheduled date before AS_OF. Never silently assign missing dates zero elapsed time. A HEARING row with no scheduled date is unscheduled and uses its request date. A valid actual future scheduled date has priority over an optional reviewed date.

**Matched resolved-history schema, one row per case + resolved stage:**

history_case_id, stage, resolution_date, outcome, net_fee_total, followup_end, fee_complete, notes

- stage is INITIAL, RECON or HEARING. outcome is FAVORABLE or OTHER. Map source outcome codes explicitly before import; do not guess favorable codes.
- net_fee_total is the total net fee collected for that case's award at that stage, including all programs/installments and after offsets/refunds. Never average payment transactions as though they were favorable cases.
- fee_complete is YES only for a mature follow-up cohort using a documented common cutoff, including confirmed completed $0 favorable cases. Do not label unresolved unpaid cases completed zeros.
- resolution_date and followup_end must be valid, followup_end cannot precede resolution_date, and neither can be after AS_OF. Reject duplicate case+stage rows and invalid/incomplete records.
- The teaching workbook selects only valid complete records for its matched cohort. Review selection/maturity bias before using this approach on real records; do not treat the small synthetic sample as an accuracy study.

### 2. Calibrate rates and fees, with matching denominators

For each stage separately:

- favorable probability = favorable cases / all resolved cases in the eligible matched stage cohort
- net fee per favorable = total net fee of those favorable cases / favorable cases

Keep completed zero-fee favorable cases in the denominator. If there are no eligible cases or no favorable cases, the relevant rate or fee is unavailable; ask for data or an explicitly approved illustrative assumption. Never invent a fallback fee.

Synthetic teaching history has 20 resolved records per stage:

- INITIAL: 3 favorable; $6,000 net fees; pI = .15; feeI = $2,000
- RECON: 4 favorable; $12,000 net fees; pR = .20; feeR = $3,000
- HEARING: 11 favorable; ten collect $4,950 and one completed favorable collects $0; $49,500 / 11 = $4,500; pH = .55

Initial-denial continuation aI = .90 and recon-denial continuation aR = .90 are explicit illustrative assumptions. They are not calculated from this history. Hearing-request-to-held probability is assumed to be 1 for this bounded model. Use additional attrition only after extending and reconciling the contract.

### 3. Use dated timing inputs and an explicit endpoint crosswalk

Public baseline sources retrieved October 6, 2026:

- SSA national initial average: **188 days**, August 2026
- SSA national recon average: **212 days**, August 2026
- Source: https://www.ssa.gov/ssa-performance (page updated October 1, 2026; values in the initial/recon chart descriptions)
- Office request-to-hearing-held table: https://www.ssa.gov/appeals/DataSets/01_NetStat_Report.xml (report 08/2026, created 09/22/2026; 159 rows)
- Demo office: code **5105, PROVIDENCE, 8.0 months**. Join exact code, not fuzzy office name. Never replace an unmatched office with a national median without explicit approval.

These are retrospective processed-case averages, not prospective conditional remaining waits. SSA's initial and recon open-data definitions run filing through payment or denial notice and include work outside medical DDS adjudication. Their exact crosswalk to the current performance chart series is unverified. Do not label 188/212 days as pure DDS medical-processing durations or claim that subtracting elapsed age estimates a conditional expected wait.

Definitions:

- https://www.ssa.gov/data/Combined-Disability-Processing-Time.html
- https://www.ssa.gov/data/disability_reconsideration_average_processing_time.html
- https://www.ssa.gov/appeals/DataSets/01_NetStat_Report.html

**Model choice:** Use 188/212 days as broad resolution-endpoint scenario proxies. For a denial path, this is a proxy denial-notice endpoint; for an early award, it is a proxy claimant-payment/resolution endpoint. Add only an illustrative **one-calendar-month representative-fee offset** from that endpoint. Do not add another full decision-to-benefit-payment delay. Real representative-fee timing must be calibrated to matching firm events before operational use.

Other illustrative timing drivers:

- initial denial → recon filing: 1 calendar month
- recon denial → hearing request: 1 calendar month
- hearing held → hearing decision: 1 calendar month
- hearing decision → representative fee: 2 calendar months
- overdue current-event future window: 2 calendar months from AS_OF
- extra unscheduled hearing shift: 0 in base, 2 in slower scenario

Office wait is request-to-hearing-held, not request-to-decision. Keep hearing-to-decision and decision-to-fee separate.

### 4. Date each path in chronological order

Use exact integer-day addition for national initial/recon proxies. Use Excel EDATE semantics for calendar months, clamping the day to the target month's last valid day. For an office fractional-month value m, use EDATE(date, INT(m)) + ROUND(MOD(m,1) × 30.44, 0). The demo's office value is exactly 8.0 months.

First estimate the **current-stage event**:

- INITIAL: stage_start + initial_days
- RECON: stage_start + recon_days
- HEARING, unscheduled: stage_start + office_wait

Choose the event date in this priority order:

1. Actual scheduled hearing at or after AS_OF, for a HEARING row
2. Valid reviewed_current_event at or after AS_OF
3. If the benchmark event is before AS_OF, flag OVERDUE: FUTURE WINDOW and assign EDATE(AS_OF, overdue_future_months)
4. Otherwise retain the benchmark event

Never use an overdue date in cash while excluding it from hearings. The same chosen event date must drive the full dependent path. Preserve overdue/review status in the output. The future-window placement is an assumption, not a measured wait estimate.

Then add only the remaining legs:

- Current INITIAL: initial endpoint → +1 month recon filing → +212 days recon endpoint → +1 month hearing request → +office wait hearing
- Current RECON: recon endpoint → +1 month hearing request → +office wait hearing
- Current HEARING: chosen hearing date directly

Apply extra_unscheduled_hearing_shift to the resulting unscheduled hearing date **after** overdue placement. Do not shift actual future scheduled hearings. Then date hearing decision = EDATE(hearing, hearing_to_decision_months) and hearing fee = EDATE(decision, hearing_decision_to_fee_months).

Early fee dates:

- initial fee date = EDATE(initial endpoint, early_endpoint_to_fee_months)
- recon fee date = EDATE(recon endpoint, early_endpoint_to_fee_months)

Do not truncate the path at the display horizon. Retain the full dated path and classify each fee as in-horizon, beyond-horizon, or before-AS_OF. A nonzero before-AS_OF forecast amount is a review issue.

### 5. Assign conditional weights from the observed current stage

For a current INITIAL case:

- initial favorable = pI
- recon favorable = (1−pI) × aI × pR
- reaches hearing = (1−pI) × aI × (1−pR) × aR
- stops after initial denial = (1−pI) × (1−aI)
- stops after recon denial = (1−pI) × aI × (1−pR) × (1−aR)

For a current RECON case:

- initial favorable = 0
- recon favorable = pR
- reaches hearing = (1−pR) × aR
- stops after recon denial = (1−pR) × (1−aR)

For a current HEARING case: reaches hearing = 1; earlier award/stop weights are 0.

For each valid case:

- hearing favorable = reaches hearing × pH
- hearing unfavorable = reaches hearing × (1−pH)
- terminal mass = initial favorable + recon favorable + both stop weights + hearing favorable + hearing unfavorable = 1

Do not add “reaches hearing” to terminal hearing favorable/unfavorable again. It is an intermediate weight.

Expected fee cash for each mutually exclusive award branch = that branch's favorable probability × its stage-specific net fee per favorable case. Include initial-stage cases that later win at recon. There is no separate undated early-award plug.

### 6. Aggregate the same rows into monthly outputs and capacity

For each monthly key use month_start ≤ event_date < EDATE(month_start,1). Do not round event dates to a nearest month or round expected case weights before summing.

Monthly outputs:

- expected hearings split by current INITIAL, RECON and HEARING stage
- total expected hearings
- initial-, recon- and hearing-award fee cash, and total fee cash
- capacity needed = expected hearings / hearings_per_advocate_month
- available advocate-equivalent capacity
- capacity gap = MAX(0, needed − available)
- additional whole people = ROUNDUP(capacity gap,0), presented only as one staffing interpretation
- when gap > 0, start hiring/training by EDATE(hearing_month_start, −lead_months)

The demo uses 20 hearings per advocate per month, 1 available advocate-equivalent, and 2 months hiring/training. Capacity includes routine preparation for those hearings. Adjust for earlier preparation, other work, leave and contractor/fractional capacity. Do not convert expected counts into guaranteed workloads or automatic hiring instructions.

Use full precision internally; display expected cases and capacity to 2 decimals and USD fees to cents. Show the peak month and busiest months from this same monthly table, never from a separate illustrative chart.

### 7. Reconcile before presenting

Return exact counts and exception lists; do not hide exclusions in a zero total.

Required checks, within numerical tolerance $0.000001 / 0.000001 expected cases:

1. Input records = valid modeled records + excluded records
2. Sum of terminal mass = valid modeled records; each valid case has mass 1
3. Valid cases = initial favorable + recon favorable + noncontinuing + reaches hearing
4. Total hearing weight = monthly hearing weight + beyond-horizon hearing weight
5. Total expected fees = in-horizon cash + beyond-horizon cash + before-AS_OF cash
6. For each award stage, branch cash sum = matching favorable weight sum × matched stage fee
7. Overdue cases contribute to hearings and cash through the same future date chain
8. No duplicate IDs, missing dates, unmatched offices or invalid history records silently enter the forecast

Produce a per-case calculation table, branch cash table, monthly output table, assumptions/source list, exclusions/review list and the reconciliation results. State that this is a planning scenario without demonstrated predictive accuracy. A back-test needs frozen historical as-of inputs, information available at that date, actual monthly/quarterly hearings and fees, error/bias measures and coverage reporting.

### 8. Synthetic acceptance test

Use the workbook's exact 100-case data, not an independently invented population:

- INITIAL: 10 July 1, 10 August 1 and 5 September 1, 2026 starts
- RECON: 10 May 1, 10 June 1 and 5 July 1, 2026 starts
- Unscheduled HEARING: 20 April 1 and 10 May 1, 2026 requests
- OVERDUE HEARING: 10 January 1, 2026 requests, placed December 1, 2026 by the explicit two-month rule
- Scheduled HEARING: 5 November 1 and 5 December 1, 2026 hearings; all have March 1, 2026 request dates
- All snapshots October 1, 2026; all office codes 5105

I-001 starts INITIAL on July 1, 2026:

| Path | Favorable weight | Expected fee | Fee date |
|---|---:|---:|---|
| Initial | .15 | $300.00 | February 5, 2027 |
| Recon | .153 | $459.00 | October 5, 2027 |
| Hearing | .30294 | $1,363.23 | September 5, 2028 |

Its initial endpoint is January 5, 2027; recon endpoint September 5, 2027; hearing request October 5, 2027; hearing June 5, 2028; decision July 5, 2028. Hearing weight .5508; noncontinuing weight .1462; hearing unfavorable .24786. Total expected fees $2,122.23.

Cohort acceptance totals:

- 3.75 initial favorable + 8.825 recon favorable + 5.655 noncontinuing + 81.77 hearings = 100
- 81.77 hearings × .55 = 44.9735 hearing favorable; 36.7965 hearing unfavorable
- initial fees $7,500; recon fees $26,475; hearing fees $202,380.75
- total expected fees $236,355.75
- in-horizon fee cash $215,907.30; beyond-horizon cash $20,448.45
- December 2026 peak 35 hearings; 1.75 capacity needed, .75 gap, one extra whole person if staffed that way; hiring/training start October 1, 2026

Slower scenario: change only extra_unscheduled_hearing_shift from 0 to 2. Total expected fees remain $236,355.75; in-horizon $202,275; beyond-horizon $34,080.75. In-horizon hearings 79.016 and hearing tail 2.754. Scheduled hearings and early-award cash remain unchanged. A later cash date is not a lost expected fee.

If results differ, identify the first case/formula/date difference and correct it before producing presentation claims. Do not force totals to match with a plug.

Forecast workbook Excel · 100 synthetic cases, every formula visible Sample case inputs CSV · run the prompt on this first Sample matched history CSV · run the prompt on this first Blank case inputs template CSV · the columns for your own data Blank matched history template CSV · the columns for your own data The prompt as a file Markdown · with setup notes

Use your own data, in firm-approved tools, with names, SSNs and birth dates removed. A person checks the inputs and the results. A forecast describes a caseload, not the claimant in front of you.

The question menu

46 questions your own data can answer

Start with the question, then find the source. Each one is tagged with where the answer lives.

About the judge

What does this ALJ actually award, and on how many of our cases? EF
How often does this ALJ issue a partially favorable decision with an amended onset date? EF
Does our win rate before this judge beat the judge’s published rate? EFSSA
Is this judge’s rate stable year to year, or did it move? SSA
Which judges send our cases to a supplemental hearing most often? SR
When a medical or vocational expert is scheduled, does our outcome change? SREF

About my own cases

Which impairments do we win, and which do we lose? EF
At which step of the sequential evaluation are our cases denied? EF
How often does the RFC the judge found match the RFC we argued? EF
Does our win rate by impairment change with the claimant’s age band? EF
Is this year’s win rate better than last year’s, with the same judges? EF
Which hearing offices do we win most at, and least? SREF
How many of our initial denials are non-medical? EF

About the clock

Which heard cases are overdue for a decision? SR
How long do our cases take at each stage, against SSA’s published average? SRSSA
How many days pass between a denial and our appeal filing? SR
How close to the appeal deadline do we usually file? SR
Is our hearing office faster or slower than six months ago? SSA
Which cases are past the published average for their stage? SRSSA

About evidence

Which providers are slowest to answer evidence requests, at the slow end, not the average? SR
Which evidence requests are still outstanding, and how old are they? SR
Which upcoming hearings have records more than six months old in the file? SREF
Which claimant information requests are still open? SR

About case movement

Which cases have stayed at the same stage longest? SR
How many cases changed stage this month, and in which direction? SR
When does our current recon inventory reach the hearing level? SRSSA
How many CE appointments are on the calendar in the next 30 days? SR
Which status changes never made it into our own system? SR
Which offices are our cases piling up in? SR

About the money

How many hearings land in the next 30, 60 and 90 days? SRSSA
What is our realized average fee per favorable decision, counting the $0 ones? AA
How long from a favorable decision to the fee payment, by stage? AA
Which favorable decisions still show no fee payment? AASR
What share of our fees comes from initial and recon awards rather than hearings? AA
How much fee cash should arrive each month for the next six months? AASRSSA
How many new 1696 acceptances arrived this quarter, against last year? AA

About what we believe

Which of our rules of thumb survive our own closed cases? EF
“Late CEs hurt us.” Do they, with the judge held constant? SREF
“That office is slow.” Is it, against the published wait? SSA
“Younger claimants are hard to win.” For every impairment, or only some? EF
“Recon is a rubber stamp.” What is our actual recon award rate? SREF
“Treating-source statements win cases.” Do they, for our cases? EF

About the data itself

Does every open case in our system appear in SSA’s status reports? SR
Which cases appear in SSA’s reports but not in our system? SR
How current is each representative’s export? SR
Which fields are blank most often in our exports? SR

SR Status reports · EF eFolder · AA AARPS · SSA SSA public files

Also from the Playbook · NOSSCR July 2026 workshop

How to evaluate legal software before you sign

A scorecard you can bring to any demo, the five questions to ask before you sign, and the red flags that mean walk away.

Get the scorecard Book a free strategy session

The framework

Four things that actually matter

Score each criterion 1 to 5 during the demo. Weight them by what your firm needs most. That is the whole system. Cost is deliberately not a fifth box: price only means something relative to these four, which is why the money questions live in the question bank below.

Built for this work

Generic legal software can be configured into disability work. Purpose-built software starts there. Configuration is a real cost: in dollars, in time, and in the workflows your staff invents to bridge the gaps.

What to look for

Does the workflow speak SSD natively (hearing levels, CE exams, OTR requests), or do you rename "matters" and build it yourself?
Who else in disability law uses it? Ask for names you recognize.
Configuration depth cuts both ways: power for firms with someone to wield it, a tax for everyone else.

Plays well with your stack

Integration is no longer a feature checkbox. It has become the lead criterion. A tool that does not talk to your stack creates a part-time data-entry job you never budgeted for.

What to look for

Direct integration vs. middleware (Zapier) vs. nothing, in that order.
Open API vs. closed: can you get your data out, and can other tools get in?
"Integration" on the roadmap is not integration. Score what exists today.

Your staff will actually use it

Implementation is where good purchases die. The buyer evaluates features; the staff lives with friction. Training burden is scoreable in the demo, if you know to ask.

What to look for

Time-to-first-value: what can a paralegal do after one hour? After one phone call?
Who does the training, the vendor or you? Is onboarding a product or a PDF?
Will it survive your actual team, including remote and overseas staff?

The vendor will still be around

Once a tool becomes load-bearing, vendor health is your firm's risk. You cannot read their books, but you can read the proxies.

What to look for

Shipping velocity: when did they last release something? Did customer feedback visibly shape it?
Trajectory of the customer base: growing in your practice area, or harvesting it?
Roadmap honesty: do they ever say "no" or "not yet"? A vendor with no "no" is selling, not building.
Security posture as a durability proxy: certifications cost real money and discipline. A vendor who invested in them is planning to stay.

The scorecard

Four rows, one demo

Score 1 to 5 per criterion, in or right after the demo, while it is fresh. Set your weights before you shop, not after: a solo and a 600-case firm should weight these differently.

Download the scorecard (PDF)

Criterion	Weight (High / Med / Low)	Score (1–5)
1. Built for this work	____	__ / 5
2. Plays well with your stack	____	__ / 5
3. Your staff will actually use it	____	__ / 5
4. The vendor will still be around	____	__ / 5

Tie-breaker: two tools tied on total? The one with the higher staff adoption score wins. Every time.

Ask these in any demo

Five questions that make you the smart buyer in the room

A vague question ("Do you integrate with my CMS?") invites a vague yes. A precise question gets the real answer, because the vendor knows you will check.

1

"Is that live today, or on the roadmap?"

Ask it about every feature that matters to you. If it is not live, it does not exist yet.
2

"Show me this working on a disability case."

Hearing levels, CE exams, SSA deadlines. Your workflow, not a generic matter.
3

"What is my total first-year cost, in writing?"

Implementation, training, add-ons, and what the price becomes at renewal.
4

"What can my paralegal do after one hour?"

Then ask who runs the training: them, or you.
5

"What does your SSD forms library look like, and can I take it with me?"

Purpose-built software ships CE exam, OTR, and hearing templates. A generic tool does not, and may not let you export your own either.

Go deeper

The extended question bank

Per-criterion versions of the five questions, for when a purchase is big enough to deserve a second demo.

Built for this work

· Show me a disability case in your system. Are hearing levels, CE exams, and OTR requests native, or do I configure them myself?
· Which SSD firms use this today? Give me names I would recognize.
· How much configuration does a firm my size typically need before this is useful, and who does that work?

Plays well with your stack

· Which of your integrations with my current tools are live today, direct, and not through Zapier?
· Is your API open? Can I export my data, and can other tools connect to it?
· Can I talk to a firm that uses this exact integration right now?

Your staff will actually use it

· What can my paralegal do after one hour in the product?
· Who runs training, you or me? Is onboarding a product or a PDF?
· How does this work for remote or overseas staff?
· For references: "If this tool disappeared tomorrow, how would your staff react?"

The vendor will still be around

· What did you release in the last 90 days, and what customer feedback shaped it?
· Is your customer base in disability law growing?
· What have you said "no" or "not yet" to on the roadmap?
· Which security certifications do you hold, and can I see the report?

If the product says "AI" on the label

· Point to the click: where exactly in my workflow does the AI do something? Show me the moment.
· What happens when it is wrong? Real AI products build in a verification workflow, because their builders know the failure modes.
· What would I lose if you turned the AI off? If the honest answer is "nothing," you are paying AI prices for the label.

The paperwork that matters

"Are you SOC 2 compliant?" Here is what you are actually asking.

SOC 2

An independent auditor checked the vendor's security controls. Type I means the controls existed on audit day. Type II means they actually operated over months. Ask for Type II, and ask to see the report.

The honest decoder

Certifications do not mean the product is good. They mean the company submitted to outside scrutiny and invested in staying around. No certification plus vague security answers on medical data is a walk-away, not a discount.

One line to ask: "Can you share your SOC 2 Type II report and your data-handling summary?" Then watch whether the answer is a document or a story.

Walk away

The red flags that should end the conversation

"It's basically ready."

Roadmap answers to current-state questions. If it is not live, it does not exist.

Pricing you can't get in writing.

If the price needs a phone call, the price is negotiable. Which means someone else paid less.

No references in disability law.

"Law firms love us" is not "SSD firms use us."

Your data, their hostage.

No export path, closed API, or vague answers about leaving.

The demo never touches your workflow.

If they will not demo your use case, the polish is the product.

Free · 20 minutes · No pitch required

Want a second set of eyes? Book a free software strategy session.

Bring your current stack, a decision you are weighing, or a filled-out scorecard, and we will walk through the framework as it applies to your firm. Often the biggest finding is a tool you can stop paying for.

Audit what you already own against the four criteria
Pressure-test a purchase you are considering, any vendor
And if you want to see how Chronicle scores, bring the scorecard to that too

Book your strategy session →

Also from the Playbook series

AI tools for your ERE status reports

Four copy-paste prompts that turn a raw ERE CSV export into clean, actionable spreadsheets. Works in ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini. No account or login needed.

How to use these tools

Open an AI assistant

ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini — any of them work.

Use a prompt below

Click "Open in Claude" or "Open in ChatGPT," or copy and paste manually.

Attach your CSV export

Drag your ERE status-report CSV in and send. SSNs are masked to the last 4 digits.

The four tools

Click to open directly in Claude or ChatGPT, or copy and paste manually.

Share: LinkedIn

Events

Hearings & CE Appointments

Pulls every scheduled date out of a status report and lines them up in one spreadsheet — hearings from a hearing report, or consultative-exam (CE) appointments from an Initial/Recon report. Use it when you want a single calendar-style list of everything coming up.

Attach: One hearing report OR one Initial/Recon report

View full prompt

You are a meticulous legal-operations assistant. I will attach ONE CSV that is a Social Security disability "status report" export. Turn it into a spreadsheet of events. Do not invent or infer data that isn't present.

STEP 1 — Detect the report type from the header row:
- HEARING report: has columns "Hearing Office with Jurisdiction" and "Hearing Scheduled Date".
- INITIAL/RECONSIDERATION report: has a "Case Level" column and "CE Appointment # N" columns.
If it is an APPEALS report (has "Appeals Office with Jurisdiction") or anything else, say so and stop — this skill only handles hearings and CE appointments.

STEP 2 — Extract events.

If HEARING report: create one event for every row that has a non-empty "Hearing Scheduled Date". Use:
- Date = Hearing Scheduled Date
- Start Time = Hearing Time (may include a timezone like "10:30 AM ET")
- Event Type = Hearing
- Status = Status of Case
- ALJ / Facility = ALJ First Name + ALJ Last Name
- Participants = list any of: "ME: <Medical Expert>", "VE: <Vocational Expert>"
- Location = combine the non-empty of: "Rep: <Representative Location>", "Client: <Claimant Location>", "ALJ: <ALJ Location>"
Skip rows with no Hearing Scheduled Date (not yet scheduled).

If INITIAL/RECONSIDERATION report: each "CE Appointment # N" cell holds ONE appointment as a comma-separated "Key: Value" string. Parsing rules:
- Split on ", " EXCEPT inside square brackets [ ... ].
- Recognize these key aliases: "Appointment Start Taheele" = Start Time, "Appointment End Taheele" = End Time.
- "Facility: [ Organization Name: ..., Individual Name: ..., Department Name: ... ]" holds the facility sub-fields inside brackets.
Create one event per CE Appointment cell that has an "Appointment Date". Use:
- Date = Appointment Date
- Start Time = Appointment Start Taheele ; End Time = Appointment End Taheele
- Event Type = CE
- Status = the appointment's "Status"
- ALJ / Facility = the Facility "Organization Name"
- Participants = any of "Individual: <Individual Name>", "Dept: <Department Name>"
- Location = "Facility Address"
- Notes = "Attendance Confirmed: <Yes/No>" if present
Skip CE cells with no Appointment Date.

For both: keep the timezone abbreviation exactly as written (ET, CT, MT, PT).
Claimant = "First Name Last Name". Last4SSN = the Last 4 SSN value as given.

STEP 3 — Output, in this order:
1. A one-line summary: report type detected + number of events found.
2. A preview table (first 10 events) with columns: Claimant | Last4SSN | Event Type | Date | Start Time | End Time | Timezone | Status | Location | ALJ / Facility | Participants | Notes
3. The COMPLETE result as CSV inside a ```csv code block, same columns, every event.
If you are able to generate a downloadable .csv or .xlsx file in this environment, also do that and give me the download link. Otherwise the CSV block is fine.

Sort events by Date ascending.

If no events are found, say "No events found in this report" and stop.

Outstanding Questionnaires

Track Overdue Paperwork

Scans an Initial/Recon report for questionnaires SSA sent to your claimant that haven't come back yet, sorted by how long they've been outstanding — so the most overdue are at the top. Use it when you need to chase missing paperwork.

Attach: One Initial/Recon report

View full prompt

You are a meticulous legal-operations assistant. I will attach ONE CSV that is a Social Security "Initial / Reconsideration" status-report export. Produce a list of OUTSTANDING questionnaires. Do not invent data.

STEP 0 — Confirm this is an initial/reconsideration report: it has a "Case Level" column and "Claimant Information Request # N" columns. If it instead looks like a hearing or appeals report, say so and stop.

STEP 1 — Each "Claimant Information Request # N" cell holds ONE request as a comma-separated "Key: Value" string. Split on ", " EXCEPT inside square brackets [ ... ]. From each request read: "Letter Name", "Date Sent", "Date Received", and the first "Address N: [ ... Address: <value> ]" (the mailing address).

STEP 2 — Keep a request ONLY IF:
(a) its Letter Name is a questionnaire — either it appears in the list below, OR its name contains the word "Questionnaire"; AND
(b) it has a non-empty "Date Sent"; AND
(c) it has NO "Date Received" (still outstanding).

Questionnaire letter names:
Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire; Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire - SP;
Activities of Daily Living-Third Party; Cardiac Questionnaire;
Child Questionnaire Age 1 to 3rd Birthday; Child Questionnaire Age 12 to 18th Birthday;
Child Questionnaire Age 3 to 6th Birthday; Child Questionnaire Age 6 to 12th Birthday;
Child Questionnaire Birth to 1st Birthday; Claimant Evidence Followup;
Claimant Evidence Followup - SP; Disability Report Appeal; Employer Questionnaire;
Fatigue Questionnaire; Headache Questionnaire; Multiple Questionnaires;
Pain Questionnaire; Pain Questionnaire - SP; Pain Report-Child;
Scheduling Text/Email Agreement Letter and Form; Seizure Questionnaire;
Seizure Witness Questionnaire; Telehealth CE Agreement Form;
Vendor Specific Signed ROI Request; Vision Questionnaire; Vision Questionnaire - SP;
Wet Signed SSA-827 Request; Work History Questionnaire; Work History Questionnaire - SP.

STEP 3 — For each kept request compute:
- Claimant = "First Name Last Name"
- Last4SSN = the Last 4 SSN value
- Questionnaire = Letter Name
- Date Sent
- Days Outstanding = (today's date) minus (Date Sent), in whole days
- Mailing Address = the address value

STEP 4 — Output, in this order:
1. One-line summary: number of outstanding questionnaires across N claimants.
2. Preview table (first 10 rows), sorted by Days Outstanding (largest first), columns: Claimant | Last4SSN | Questionnaire | Date Sent | Days Outstanding | Mailing Address
3. The COMPLETE result as CSV in a ```csv code block, same columns, all rows, same sort.
If you can generate a downloadable .csv/.xlsx in this environment, also do that.

If no outstanding questionnaires are found, say "No outstanding questionnaires found" and stop.

What Changed

Compare Two Reports

Compares two reports of the same level and tells you exactly what moved for each claimant — decisions, status changes, ALJ swaps, fee changes, and more — plus who's new and who dropped off. Use it when you pull reports regularly and want just the "what's new since last time."

Attach: Two reports of the same level (older + newer)

View full prompt

You are a meticulous legal-operations assistant. I will attach TWO CSV status-report exports that are the SAME report level (both Hearing, both Initial/Recon, or both Appeals) — an OLDER one and a NEWER one. Produce a clear "what changed" report. Do not invent data.

STEP 0 — Confirm both files are the same level (compare their header columns). If they are different levels, say so and stop. If you can't tell which is older, ask me; if filenames or a date column make it obvious, proceed (older = earlier export).

STEP 1 — Match claimants across the two files by: Last Name + First Name + Last 4 SSN.

STEP 2 — For each matched claimant, compare every column and collect the cells that changed. Group the changes into these categories, and present them in THIS priority order (most important first):
1. Decisions — "T2 Decision", "T16 Decision"
2. Status of Case — "Status of Case"
3. ALJ — "ALJ First Name", "ALJ Last Name", "ALJ Location"
4. Experts — "Medical Expert", "Vocational Expert"
5. Fee — "Fee Agreement", "Fee Petition"
6. Locations & scheduling — "Claimant Location", "Representative Location", "Hearing Scheduled Date", "Hearing Time"
7. Other — any other column that changed

STEP 3 — Also list:
- NEW claimants: in the newer file but not the older.
- DROPPED claimants: in the older file but not the newer.

STEP 4 — Output, in this order:
1. One-line summary: X claimants changed, Y new, Z dropped.
2. A readable section per category (skip empty categories). Under each, one bullet per claimant: "Claimant (Last4SSN): <Field> '<old>' -> '<new>'".
3. A NEW claimants list and a DROPPED claimants list (Claimant + Last4SSN).
4. The COMPLETE change set as CSV in a ```csv code block with columns: Claimant | Last4SSN | Field | Old Value | New Value | Category
   (use Category = "New" / "Dropped" for appeared/removed claimants, with the other value columns left blank).
If you can produce a downloadable .csv/.xlsx here, also do that.

If nothing changed between the two reports, say "No changes detected between the two reports" and stop.

Active Caseload by Status

Snapshot Dashboard

Counts up your cases and groups them by lifecycle stage for that level — Not Scheduled, Scheduled, Hearing Complete, Closed by outcome — for a quick at-a-glance dashboard. Use it when you want to know how many cases are sitting in each stage right now.

Attach: One report (any level) — or attach several at once

View full prompt

You are a meticulous legal-operations assistant. I will attach one (or more) CSV status-report exports. For each file, produce a count of cases by lifecycle stage. Do not invent data. Each row = one case.

STEP 1 — Detect the level from the header:
- INITIAL / RECONSIDERATION: has "Case Level" (use the per-row Case Level value: "Initial" or "Reconsideration").
- HEARING: has "Hearing Office with Jurisdiction".
- APPEALS: has "Appeals Office with Jurisdiction".

STEP 2 — For each case, read its "Status of Case" (lowercased) and its "T2 Decision" and "T16 Decision" cells.

Decision sets:
- FAVORABLE = {Favorable, Favorable Decision, Fully Favorable}
- UNFAVORABLE = {Unfavorable, Dismissal, Dimissal, Dismissal - Untimely, Dismissal - Special, Dismissal - Withdrawal, Denied, Other, Deny / Decline (One Adjudicator)}
- REMAND = {Remand, Remand (Two Adjudicators)}
"No decision" = both T2 Decision and T16 Decision are empty.

STEP 3 — Assign each case to ONE stage:

A case is CLOSED if it has any decision (T2 or T16 in any set above) OR its status_of_case is a closed status (see each level below). Otherwise it is ACTIVE and goes to the matching active stage by its lowercased status_of_case.

INITIAL / RECONSIDERATION stages:
- Pending (active): open; staging; t2 staging; t16 staging; t16 staging, t2 staging;
  t16 staging, t2 staging, t2 staging; t2 staging, t16 staging;
  t2 staging, t2 staging;
  t16 pre-receipt in process, t2 pre-receipt in process; t16 pre-receipt, t2 staging
- Processing (active): assigned; t2 assigned; t16 assigned; t16 assigned, t2 assigned;
  t16 assigned, t2 assigned, t2 assigned;
  t16 assigned, t2 assigned, t2 assigned, t2 assigned; t2 assigned, t16 assigned;
  t2 assigned, t2 assigned; t2 assigned, t2 assigned, t2 assigned;
  t16 assignemnt in progress; t2 assignemnt in progress;
  t16 assignemnt in progress, t2 assignemnt in progress; t16 pre-receipt, t2 assigned;
  t16 staging, t2 closed; t16 assigned, t2 closed;
  t16 assigned, t2 assigned, t2 closed; t16 closed, t2 staging;
  t16 closed, t2 assigned; t16 closed, t2 assigned, t2 assigned;
  t2 closure in progress; t16 closure in progress;
  t16 closure in progress, t2 closure in progress
- Closed: closed; t2 closed; t2 closed, t2 closed; t16 closed; t16 closed, t2 closed;
  t16 closed, t2 closed, t2 closed; t16 closed, t2 closed, t2 closed, t2 closed

HEARING stages:
- Not Scheduled (active): open; master docket; folder assembly;
  pending folder assembly; pre hearing development; in review; ready to schedule;
  pre hearing review; pending review
- Scheduled (active): scheduled hearing
- Hearing Complete (active): post hearing development; post hearing review;
  pending decision writing; decision writing process; pending closure
- Closed: case permanently transferred; case closed

APPEALS stages:
- Pending (active): null; new case
- Processing (active): case workup; document preparation; assigned to analyst;
  assigned to adjudicator(s); pending analyst assignment
- Closed: case permanently transferred; case closed

STEP 4 — For CLOSED cases, sub-classify by outcome:
- Remand: has a REMAND decision.
- Favorable: has a FAVORABLE decision and NOT an UNFAVORABLE one.
- Unfavorable: has an UNFAVORABLE decision and NOT a FAVORABLE one.
- Partial Favorable: has BOTH a FAVORABLE and an UNFAVORABLE decision.
- (Closed by status with no decision: list as "Closed — no decision".)

STEP 5 — Output per level:
1. Heading with the level and total case count.
2. ACTIVE stages with counts (and the active total).
3. CLOSED with its outcome sub-breakdown.
Present as a small table: Stage | Count. Counts only.
End with: "Reply 'names for <stage>' and I'll list the claimants in that stage."
If multiple files / levels were attached, repeat per level.

ERE exports already mask Social Security numbers to the last 4 digits — safe to paste into any AI assistant.

Missed an earlier session?

The Disability Firm Playbook is an ongoing series. Watch the replay below.

Session 1

Spotting At-Risk Cases Before They Escalate

Read recap →

Session 2

What You're Missing Every Time You Log Into ERE, AARPS, and AROS

Read recap →

Get future Playbook sessions

The Disability Firm Playbook covers what proactive firms are doing differently. Get the next session and new tools directly in your inbox.

Want this without the manual step?

Chronicle runs this across your entire caseload — automatically, every night.

These prompts work great. But they still require pulling a CSV, opening an AI assistant, and running the analysis each time. Chronicle connects directly to ERE and surfaces changes, hearings, questionnaires, and caseload snapshots automatically — so your team opens Chronicle instead of logging into the portal.

Book a 20-min walkthrough →

See How Chronicle Works for Your Firm

Compare for yourself how daily monitoring changes your workflow.

Book a Demo

Know your numbers with data you already have

Pick one number to know by next Friday

Chart your open cases by age

Look up your hearing offices’ waits

Work out your realized average fee

Hearing workload and fee cash from the cases you already have

The forecast prompt

46 questions your own data can answer

About the judge

About my own cases

About the clock

About evidence

About case movement

About the money

About what we believe

About the data itself

How to evaluate legal software before you sign

Four things that actually matter

Built for this work

Plays well with your stack

Your staff will actually use it

The vendor will still be around

Four rows, one demo

Five questions that make you the smart buyer in the room

The extended question bank

"Are you SOC 2 compliant?" Here is what you are actually asking.

The red flags that should end the conversation

Want a second set of eyes? Book a free software strategy session.

AI tools for your ERE status reports

The four tools

Events

Outstanding Questionnaires

What Changed

Active Caseload by Status

Missed an earlier session?

Get future Playbook sessions

Chronicle runs this across your entire caseload — automatically, every night.

See How Chronicle Works for Your Firm

Know your numbers
with data you already have