After we find that you are disabled, we must evaluate your impairment(s) from time to time to determine if you are still eligible for payments based on disability. We call this evaluation a continuing disability review. We may begin a continuing disability review for any number of reasons including your failure to follow the provisions of the Social Security Act or these regulations. When we begin such a review, we will notify you that we are reviewing your eligibility for payments, why we are reviewing your eligibility, that in medical reviews the medical improvement review standard will apply, that our review could result in the termination of your payments, and that you have the right to submit medical and other evidence for our consideration during the continuing disability review. In doing a medical review, we will develop a complete medical history of at least the preceding 12 months in any case in which a determination is made that you are no longer under a disability. If this review shows that we should stop your payments, we will notify you in writing and give you an opportunity to appeal. In § 416.990 we describe those events that may prompt us to review whether you continue to be disabled.
[51 FR 16826, May 7, 1986]
Notes of Decisions
Cooper v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 131 F.4th 995 (9th Cir. 2025).
· cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 416.989 . Additionally, Section 404 of the Social Security Act requires SSA to recover or adjust benefits “[w]henever the Commissioner of Social Security finds that more or less than the correct amount of payment has been made to any person under this subchapter .”
J.B. Ex Rel. Barboza v. Astrue, 738 F. Supp. 2d 260 (D. Mass. 2010).
“20 C.F.R. § 416.989 . This evaluation, called a Continuing Disability Review (“CDR”), entails a three-step analysis.”
Alfred v. Barnhart, 181 F. App'x 447 (5th Cir. 2006).
“See 20 C.F.R. § 416.989 (explaining that the Social Security Administration must periodically evaluate a benefit recipient’s impairments to determine their continuing eligibility for benefits).”
Thao v. O'Malley (D. Minnesota 2024).
· cites it 2× “) Subsequently, as required by 20 C.F.R. § 416.989 , the Commissioner initiated a continuing disability review, and because Plaintiff’s condition had improved, determined that he was no longer disabled.”
(SS) Lambert v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (E.D. Cal. 2019).
“Plaintiff then 2 requested and appeared for a hearing before an ALJ on November 18, 2016, and then again on 3 April 18, 2017.”
Smith v. O'Malley (N.D. Ill. 2018).
“20 C.F.R. § 416.989 . When determining a claimant’s continued eligibility for benefits, the SSA must consider whether there has been any “medical improvement” in the claimant’s impairments and, if so, whether the improvement is related to the ability to work.”
McBride v. Colvin (N.D. Ill. 2018).
“20 C.F.R. § 416.989 . When determining a claimant’s continued eligibility for benefits, the SSA must consider whether there has been any “medical improvement” in the claimant’s impairments and, if so, whether the improvement is related to the ability to work.”
Madonna v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (N.D. Ind. 2021).
“While medical conditions are relevant when appeals arise from a continuing disability review, see 20 C.F.R. § 416.989 , they aren’t relevant here.”
Sheppard v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (W.D.N.Y. 2023).
“§§ 421 (i)(1), 425(a); 20 C.F.R. § 416.989 . The Commissioner “may terminate benefits to a person previously adjudged to be disabled only upon substantial evidence that the individual’s condition has improved to the point that he or she is no longer disabled, or that the initial…”
Kunkle v. Kijakazi (W.D. Pa. 2022).
“” 20 C.F.R. § 416.989 . The determination of a claimant’s continued disability is known as “a continuing disability review” (“CDR”).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.